36–577 

116TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 116–107 

AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG 

ADMINISTRATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2020 

JUNE 6, 2019.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. BISHOP, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

MINORITY VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 3164] 

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in 

explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and 

Related Agencies for fiscal year 2020. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Title I—Agricultural Programs ............................................................................... 3 

Title II—Farm Production and Conservation Programs ...................................... 40 

Title III—Rural Development Programs ............................................................... 47 

Title IV—Domestic Food Programs ........................................................................ 60 

Title V—Foreign Assistance and Related Programs ............................................. 67 

Title VI—Related Agencies and Food and Drug Administration ......................... 70 

Title VII—General Provisions ................................................................................. 86 

OVERVIEW 

The Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee has jurisdiction over the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) except for the Forest Service, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and the Farm Credit Administration (FCA). 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
2 

The Subcommittee’s responsibility covers a diverse group of 

agencies responsible for such things as promoting the production of 

a plentiful food supply; assisting farmers and ranchers across the 

country with sound production practices; improving the quality of 

life and vitality of communities in rural America; assisting people 

in the U.S. and abroad with nutritional needs; supporting research 

and development in agriculture to improve productivity and stability; overseeing commodity markets that provide confidence for 

businesses, traders, investors, and the public; supporting a safe 

food supply; and ensuring safe and effective drugs and medical devices. The activities of these agencies impact Americans every day 

of the year. 

The fiscal year 2020 discretionary spending in this bill totals 

$24,310,000,000, which is $1,000,000,000 above the fiscal year 2019 

enacted level and $5,111,351,000 above the President’s budget request for fiscal year 2020. 

The funding levels provided in this appropriations bill continue 

to demonstrate how seriously this Committee takes its responsibility to fund the highest priority programs and activities to serve 

the American people. 

OVERSIGHT AND HEARINGS

The Subcommittee held eight hearings related to the responsibilities of the Subcommittee and key agriculture issues. The hearings 

were: 

1. Food and Drug Administration Status of Operations—February 27, 2019 

2. USDA Inspector General—March 12, 2019 

3. Member Day—March 26, 2019 

4. USDA’s Proposed Relocation of the Economic Research 

Service and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture— 

March 27, 2019 

5. The Rural Economy—April 2, 2019 

6. Food and Drug Administration FY 2020 Budget Request— 

April 3, 2019 

7. USDA FY 2020 Budget Request—April 9, 2019 

8. Economic Opportunities for Farmers through Sustainable 

Agricultural Practices—April 10, 2019 

Performance Measures.—The Committee directs USDA and FDA 

to comply with title 31 of the United States Code, including the development of their organizational priority goals and outcomes such 

as performance outcome measures, output measures, efficiency 

measures, and customer service measures. The Committee directs 

them to brief the Committee on the implementation plan for measures within 60 days of enactment of the Act. 

In this report, ‘‘the Committees’’ refers to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
3 

TITLE I 

AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS 

PROCESSING, RESEARCH AND MARKETING

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $46,603,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 41,373,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 45,112,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥1,491,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +3,739,000 

The following table reflects the amount provided by the Committee for each office and activity: 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Office of the Secretary ........................................................................................................ $5,051 $4,850 $4,850 

Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development ............................................................. 800 800 0 

Office of Homeland Security ............................................................................................... 1,496 1,448 1,448 

Office of Partnerships and Public Engagement ................................................................. 4,711 1,672 6,211 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration ......................................................... 875 875 875 

Departmental Administration .............................................................................................. 22,301 21,376 21,376 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations and Intergovernmental 

Affairs ............................................................................................................................. 3,869 3,091 3,091 

Office of Communications .................................................................................................. 7,500 7,261 7,261 

Total, Office of the Secretary .................................................................................... $46,603 $41,373 $45,112 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Secretary, the Committee provides an appropriation of $45,112,000. 

The Committee accepts the President’s proposed reductions for 

the Immediate Office of the Secretary, the Office of Homeland Security, Departmental Administration, the Office of the Assistant 

Secretary for Congressional Relations and Intergovernmental Affairs, and the Office of Communications. 

The Committee adopts the President’s proposed funding level for 

the Assistant Secretary for Administration. 

The Committee provides an increase of $1,500,000 over the 2019 

enacted level for the Office of Partnerships and Public Engagement 

(OPPE) and rejects the reductions proposed in the budget request. 

The Committee strongly supports the Outreach and Assistance for 

Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Veterans program. This funding is in addition to the $15,000,000 in mandatory funds available 

in 2020. In a separate provision in Title VII, an additional 

$10,000,000 for the Farm Opportunities Training and Outreach 

Program is provided. OPPE is directed to use not more than five 

percent of this sum for administrative costs. 

Adapting to a changing climate.—The Committee directs USDA 

to conduct a survey on current programs that aid farmers in mitigating and adapting to the effects of the changing climate, including programs that support carbon sequestration in the soil, and 

identify opportunities to expand this work. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
4 

Advertising expenditures.—The Committee believes that, as the 

largest advertiser in the United States, the federal government 

should work to ensure fair access to its advertising contracts for 

small disadvantaged businesses and businesses owned by minorities and women. The Committee directs USDA to include the following information in a report to the Committee 60 days after enactment of this Act: expenditures for fiscal year 2019 and expected 

expenditures for fiscal year 2020 and 2021, respectively, for (1) all 

contracts for advertising services; and (2) contracts for the advertising services of socially and economically disadvantaged small 

business concerns (as defined in section 8(a)(4) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a)(4)), and women- and minority-owned 

businesses. 

Agroterrorism.—The United States enjoys a safe, plentiful, and 

inexpensive food supply. The Committee views domestic food production as a priority for national security. The Committee directs 

the Secretary to explore USDA’s laboratory and response capacity 

to address the threat of agroterrorism, and how national response 

plans can better incorporate agroterrorism. The Committee encourages the Secretary to coordinate with the Department of Homeland 

Security, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), 

the Department of the Interior, the intelligence agencies, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and other agencies to improve 

response plans, conduct vulnerability assessments, and expand 

monitoring and surveillance for agroterrorism. The Committee also 

encourages the Secretary to focus on bolstering tracking systems 

for agricultural products, laboratory networks, and border inspection training. 

Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Farmers.—The Committee urges the Secretary to measure the effectiveness of USDA’s recruitment and outreach plans for the increasing 

number of Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander 

farmers. The Committee directs the Department to make available 

required resources in additional Asian American and Pacific Islander languages to reduce any cultural or linguistic barriers for 

these farmers. 

CCC Report.—The Committee directs the Secretary to provide a 

report on November 15, 2019, and May 18, 2020, on planned uses 

of funding under the authorities of Section 4 and Section 11 of the 

CCC Charter Act. 

Census of Agriculture.—The Committee is aware that urban agriculture is a rapidly growing sector of the U.S. agricultural economy 

and that there is a need to understand emerging agricultural production. The Committee directs the Department to collect data on 

urban, indoor, and emerging agricultural production, such as community gardens, rooftop farms, greenhouses and indoor farms, in 

the 2022 Census of Agriculture. The Committee expects the Department to provide resources for this work in its annual budget 

request to Congress when it begins planning for the 2022 census. 

Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) Obligations and Commitments.—The Secretary is directed to notify the Committees in writing 15 days prior to the obligation or commitment of any emergency funds from the CCC. 

Communication from USDA.—A collaborative working relationship between the Committee and USDA is necessary to ensure effiVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
5 

cient and effective implementation of Congress’ funding decisions. 

USDA is directed to ensure that the Committee is notified of major 

changes to existing policies and any significant developments in its 

operations, before providing non-governmental stakeholders such 

information, before making the changes public and before implementing them. 

Design-Build.—The Committee encourages the Department to 

use the design-build method of project delivery when appropriate. 

Distribution of Farm Subsidies.—The Committee directs the Department to provide to the Committees not later than 180 days 

after the enactment of this Act a report on the distribution of farm 

subsidies, low interest loans, and cost-share conservation programs 

and its impact on minority-owned farms. 

ERS/NIFA relocation.—On August 8, 2018, the Secretary sent 

the Committees a letter notifying them that he was planning to 

move the Economic Research Service (ERS), and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture outside of the greater Washington, 

D.C., area. Seven days later, without waiting the statutorily-required 30 days after notification, in violation of the reprogramming 

rules in P.L. 116–6, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019, the 

Secretary published a Federal Register notice that the Department 

was seeking expressions of interest from parties interested in housing the two agencies. At no point in this process, however, has 

USDA solicited public comment on this proposal. Since then, it has 

moved forward, despite the clearly expressed opposition of many 

members of the House and Senate. It failed to comply with the direction of the conferees on the 2019 Act to submit all cost benefits 

for the move and a detailed analysis of any research benefits of a 

relocation. It has flatly refused numerous requests from this Committee and other members of Congress to provide the initial cost 

benefit analysis that preceded the decision to go ahead with the 

proposal. These agencies’ mission is to achieve the best science 

through research that advances U.S. agriculture and our understanding of the agricultural economy. The Committee believes that 

the Department’s proposal puts that mission at risk and the Committee has therefore included bill language to prevent it. 

Flexibility in Loan and Loan Guarantee Levels.—The bill includes language to exceed by up to 25 percent the limitation on 

loan and loan guarantee levels without budget authority upon written notification to the Committees on Appropriations. 

GAO Report on Credit Service to Socially Disadvantaged Farmers 

and Ranchers.—Section 5416 of the 2018 Farm Bill mandated a 

GAO study of the access of socially disadvantaged farmers and 

ranchers to credit. That report is expected to be released this summer. The Committee looks forward to reviewing the report and assessing the need for further work on this issue. 

Grain Export Inspection.—The Committee is aware of the ongoing contract negotiations between West Coast grain terminal operators and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union and 

recognizes the importance of reaching an agreement that works for 

both parties, as a failure to reach an agreement could result in an 

interruption in grain terminal service that would negatively impact 

the nation’s grain exports. Therefore, the Committee urges all parties to continue negotiating in good faith to ensure an equitable 

outcome that protects worker rights and benefits is expeditiously 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
6 

reached. The Committee strongly discourages USDA from requiring 

its grain inspectors to cross a picket line. 

Health Care Access for Farmers.—The Department of Agriculture 

shall conduct a study on access to affordable, ACA-compliant, highquality health care for individuals and their families who are selfemployed on small, locally-owned and family-owned businesses in 

rural communities. The report should include recommendations for 

increasing access to health insurance options for those individuals. 

The Department should submit the report to the Committee 270 

days after enactment of this Act. 

International Food Security Technical Assistance.—The Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 recognized the challenge of global 

hunger and the need to improve the delivery of assistance to meet 

immediate food security requirements and to improve nutritional 

standards for underserved populations. Section 3308 of that Act authorized USDA agencies, including the Food Nutrition and Consumer Services among other relevant agencies, to provide technical 

assistance to international entities and organizations that develop 

and improve food and nutrition safety net systems. The Committee 

notes the trend of worsening food insecurity and the growing instability that may result and urges the Secretary to prioritize the implementation of this provision. The Committee expects a report on 

the progress of this effort within 90 days of enactment. 

Loan and Grant Programs.—The Committee directs that if an estimate of loan activity for any program funded in Titles II and III 

of this bill indicates that a limitation on authority to make commitments for a fiscal year will be reached before the end of that fiscal 

year, or in any event when 75 percent of the authority to make 

commitments has been utilized, the Secretary shall promptly notify 

the Committees through OBPA. The Committee directs the Department, through OBPA, to provide quarterly reports to the Committees on the status of obligations and funds availability for the loan 

and grant programs provided in this bill. 

Moving ERS to the Office of the Chief Economist.—On August 8, 

2018, the Secretary notified the Committees that he planned to 

move ERS from the Under Secretary for Research, Education and 

Economics (REE) to the Office of the Chief Economist, which is 

part of the Office of the Secretary. The Under Secretary of REE 

also serves as USDA’s chief scientist. By law, he or she is charged 

with overseeing all issues involving scientific integrity within the 

Department. In fact, the Chief Scientist is actually empowered to 

oppose any efforts to politicize science. The Chief Economist has no 

such role or power. Keeping ERS within a mission area that is solely devoted to research ensures it will continue to be seen as a firstclass, independent research entity. Putting it under the Office of 

the Secretary puts that at jeopardy. The Committee opposes the 

proposal and has included bill language to prevent it. 

Native American Foods.—Native American tribes suffer among 

the highest rates of diabetes in the United States. Traditional Native American diets have been shown to be culturally relevant and 

protective against metabolic diseases such as diabetes. The Food 

Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) has increased the variety of traditional foods offered in the program. The 

Committee directs USDA to develop programs in conjunction with 

Indian Tribal Organizations to restore food ecosystems and revive 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
7 

traditional foods based on dietary preferences of Native American 

populations. USDA shall continue to collaborate with FDPIR agencies on recommendations for food package changes, with the goal 

of further increasing the amount and variety of traditional and locally or regionally grown food items offered through the program. 

Native Plant Use Preference.—The Committee continues to support the use of locally adapted native plant materials in the undertaking of land management activity on Federal lands under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture, including in maintenance and in restoration in response to degradation caused by 

human activity or natural events (such as fire, flood, or infestation). The Committee directs that it be the policy of the USDA that 

preference shall be made, to the extent practicable, for the use of 

locally adapted native plant materials in these cases. 

Office for Civil Rights.—The Committee requests a report from 

the Secretary on how the Office intends to manage and avoid recurrent backlogs in cases, including both those involving USDA programs and those involving USDA employees. The report is due by 

December 31, 2019. 

Pay Costs.—The Committee does not include funding for a civilian pay increase across the Department. Should the President provide a civilian pay increase for fiscal year 2020, it is assumed that 

the cost of such a pay increase will be absorbed within existing appropriations for fiscal year 2020. 

Rural Broadband.—The Committee continues to support the ReConnect program to increase access to broadband connectivity in 

unserved rural communities. The Committee continues to direct 

the Department to target grants and loans issued to areas of the 

country with the largest broadband coverage gaps. These projects 

should utilize technology that will maximize coverage of broadband 

with the most benefit to taxpayers and the rural communities 

served. Technologies to consider should include, but are not limited 

to, fiber, cable modem, fixed wireless, and television white space. 

The bill includes funding for broadband deployment through the 

Broadband Loan program, Community Connect grant program, 

Distance Learning and Telemedicine program and an additional 

$550,000,000 for the Re-Connect program. 

Rural Health Liaison.—The Committee directs the Department 

to designate a Rural Health Liaison in the Office of the Secretary 

no later than 90 days after the enactment of this Act. The Office 

of the Secretary shall work in conjunction with the Federal Office 

of Rural Health Policy under HHS to ensure that the duties of the 

Rural Health Liaison enumerated in Section 12409 of the Agriculture Improvement Act are carried out effectively. 

Rural Poverty.—In their fiscal year 2016 bills, both the House 

and Senate Appropriations Committees directed USDA to produce 

a detailed plan setting forth all USDA resources available to combat rural poverty. The report was due on April 16, 2016, and more 

than three years later, it has not been received. The Committee 

will consider penalizing the Department if it has not received the 

report before the conference on this bill begins. 

Status of House and Senate Report Language.—The Department 

is directed to include in its fiscal year 2021 Congressional Justification, as a single exhibit, a table listing all deliverables, with a column for due dates if applicable. The Office of Budget and Program 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
8 

Analysis (OBPA) is directed to provide updates on the status of 

House and Senate reports upon request from the Committees. 

USDA-owned Vehicles.—The Committee has included revised bill 

language related to the number of vehicles the Department owns, 

similar to that proposed by the administration. However, the Committee was troubled to learn that USDA’s concern about the previous language was that it limited the Department to a specific 

number of vehicles, which USDA was completely unable to certify. 

The Committee requests a report from the Department within 60 

days after enactment of this Act that describes how it plans to better manage its vehicle fleet. 

EXECUTIVE OPERATIONS

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ECONOMIST

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $21,286,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 18,513,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 21,013,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥273,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +2,500,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Chief Economist, the Committee provides 

the budget request of $21,013,000. 

Drought.—The Committee provides $2,500,000 to support the 

work of the National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC). The increase will provide 24/7 backup of NDMC weekly field data and 

build capacity to respond to the increasing number of drought-related research and operations requests to NDMC by U.S. regional 

climate hubs. 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $15,222,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 13,474,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 15,222,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +1,748,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of Hearings and Appeals, the Committee provides 

the fiscal year 2019 enacted level of $15,222,000. 

OFFICE OF BUDGET AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $9,525,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 8,199,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 9,525,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +1,326,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of Budget and Program Analysis, the Committee 

provides the fiscal year 2019 enacted level of $9,525,000. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
9 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $55,630,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 101,400,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 101,400,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +45,770,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Chief Information Officer, the Committee 

provides an appropriation of $101,400,000. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $6,028,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 13,500,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 6,028,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥7,472,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, the Committee provides an appropriation of $6,028,000. 

The Committee provides no funds for the New Pay Initiative. The 

five sentences devoted to this in the budget justification do not provide sufficient justification for the requested increase of $7,500,000 

for the Initiative. 

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR CIVIL RIGHTS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $901,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 800,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 901,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +101,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, the 

Committee provides the fiscal year 2019 enacted level of $901,000. 

OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $24,206,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 21,228,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 24,206,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +2,978,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of Civil Rights, the Committee provides the fiscal 

year 2019 enacted level of $24,206,000. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
10 

AGRICULTURE BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $59,967,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 331,114,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 331,114,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +271,147,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Agriculture Buildings and Facilities, the Committee provides 

the requested level of $331,114,000. The Committee provides the 

full request because it strongly supports USDA’s ‘‘One Neighborhood’’ proposal to renovate USDA headquarters buildings. Along 

with renovation of the George Washington Carver facility in Beltsville, MD, USDA will have greatly expanded capacity in the National Capital Region (NCR). This will end what USDA itself says 

are its ‘‘high vacancy rates’’ in the NCR. 

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $3,503,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 3,290,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 5,288,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +1,785,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +1,998,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Hazardous Materials Management, the Committee provides 

$5,288,000. The Committee rejects the reduction to the program 

proposed in the budget and provides an increase of $1,988,000 for 

additional remediation work. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $98,208,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 98,208,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 98,208,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of Inspector General (OIG), the Committee provides the fiscal year 2019 enacted level of $98,208,000. 

Animal fighting.—The Committee is very concerned about illegal 

animal fighting activity. The OIG is encouraged to increase its efforts to enforce the laws under USDA’s jurisdiction against animal 

fighting and to investigate promptly any evidence of such illegal activity. The Committee also encourages the OIG to audit USDA enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act, the Horse Protection Act, and 

the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act to help improve compliance 

with these important laws. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
11 

OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $45,146,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 41,242,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 41,242,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥3,904,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the General Counsel, the Committee provides the budget request of $41,242,000. 

OFFICE OF ETHICS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $4,136,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 2,752,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 4,136,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +1,384,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of Ethics, the Committee provides the 2019 enacted level of $4,136,000. 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND

ECONOMICS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $800,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 800,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 800,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, 

and Economics, the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$800,000. 

Antimicrobial Resistance Research Strategy.—The Committee has 

provided additional resources to ARS and NIFA that may be used 

to strengthen USDA’s ability to support an expanded focus on animal science and antibiotic stewardship. The Committee encourages 

USDA to build on the work of the Presidential Advisory Council on 

Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria and directs USDA to develop a strategic approach that coordinates all antimicrobial resistance projects in the REE mission area. The Department should explore coordinating with agencies and offices in HHS. USDA should 

also consider establishing a public-private partnership framework 

with HHS (including the Centers for Disease Control), industry, 

and land-grant universities with relevant expertise in states with 

significant livestock production to support applied research, education, and outreach to address antimicrobial-resistant animal and 

human pathogens. 

Enhancing Entrepreneurship at USDA.—While USDA deploys 

significant investments to drive agricultural innovation and enhance community vitality, the Committee believes that USDA could 

more effectively support entrepreneurship in rural communities by 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
12 

bolstering creative partnerships that connect entrepreneurs in the 

agricultural ecosystem. The Committee directs ARS and NIFA to 

work together and brief the Committee on USDA efforts that enhance and encourage entrepreneurship across rural America. The 

brief shall include a discussion of how ongoing agricultural entrepreneurship, extension, and 4–H and other youth agriculture programs at land-grant universities help to increase visibility and viability of agricultural entrepreneurship in rural America; an examination of barriers to commercialization of USDA-funded research; 

and an evaluation of USDA regulations that inhibit rural entrepreneurship. 

Leveraging Plant Genome Information.—The Committee recognizes the potential impact that variable weather, environments, 

and production systems can have on the yield and quantity of 

maize and the need for greater prediction of plant performance 

under variable growing conditions. The Committee encourages 

USDA to support research that leverages plant genomic information with phenotypic and environmental data through an interdisciplinary framework, resulting in an understanding of plant 

processes that affect productivity and the ability to predict plant 

performance. 

National Data Repository for Intelligent Agricultural Production, 

Health, and Security.—The food and agriculture sector in the 

United States is entering a new era with a proliferation of available data resulting in unprecedented opportunities for modeling, 

forecasting, and analytics that are already changing other sectors 

of the American economy. The Committee encourages USDA to explore developing a national data repository for intelligent agricultural production, health, and security. The Committee directs 

USDA to provide to the Committee a brief that explores how to develop a roadmap for policies that enable large-scale aggregation of 

agricultural production data while preserving competitive advantage for individual farmers, ranchers, producers, and processors. As 

part of the brief, USDA should identify leading land-grant universities with capacity to lead this effort and identify a consortium of 

universities to partner in defining potential goals, resource needs, 

and expected outcomes and benefits of this national repository. 

Pollinators and Colony Health Research.—The Committee recognizes that Colony Collapse Disorder and related colony health 

issues are a significant concern to beekeepers, honey producers, 

farmers, researchers, policymakers, and the public. It directs the 

Department to continue to focus on the challenges facing pollinators. The bill includes funding for a pollinator research coordinator as authorized by the 2018 Farm Bill. 

Potato Research.—The Committee supports research efforts to 

combat crop-threatening pest and disease pressures, including the 

potato cyst nematode. The Committee also recognizes the importance of research initiatives to identify and improve desired traits 

for new potato varieties and directs the Department to continue 

working with universities, industry and potato growers on these 

projects. 

Poultry Technology Research.—The Committee understands that 

the U.S. poultry industry is the most efficient in the world. However, with expected global growth in demand and competition, technological advances in broiler production are critical to increasing 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
13 

production and profitability. The Committee supports cooperative 

research that contributes to increased efficiencies in housing, 

equipment, energy and environmental controls tailored to meet the 

long-term needs of the industry. 

Screening Technologies.—The Committee encourages the development of technologies that will provide rapid, portable, and facile 

screening of food fish species at port sites and wholesale and retail 

centers. 

Vector Control.—The Committee encourages USDA to support research, including the work done through the Biotechnology Risk 

Assessment Research Grants program, to develop innovative vector 

control technologies targeted to combatting Zika-carrying Aedes 

aegypti mosquitos. The Committee is aware that vaccine development takes time, pesticide use has a variety of limitations, and 

human health effects and treatment will be a challenge for years 

to come. Therefore, the Committee urges USDA to utilize pest management programs and partner organizations to conduct research 

to develop and test effective repellents, create new molecular pesticide technologies that prevent mosquitoes from reproducing, and 

explore natural product remedies to deter pests. 

ECONOMIC RESEARCH SERVICE

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $86,757,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 60,500,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 87,757,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +1,000,00 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +27,257,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Economic Research Service (ERS), the Committee provides an appropriation of $87,757,000. The Committee strongly disagrees with USDA’s proposal to relocate ERS and provides no funding for relocation activities. In addition, the Committee does not 

concur with the request to significantly reduce ERS’ research activities. 

Recovering Value from Animal Waste.—The Committee is interested in understanding the potential cost savings that may arise 

from more efficiently processing and managing animal waste. The 

Committee directs ERS to provide a report to the Committee not 

later than 1 year after the enactment of this Act on potential opportunities to recover greater value for farmers from animal waste. 

The report shall include a discussion of the following: 1) direct and 

indirect financial revenue opportunities; 2) the potential value of i) 

on-farm reuse of products such as fertilizer application to cropland; 

ii) remanufactured products; iii) energy recovery; 3) potential tax 

credits; 4) nutrient recovery; 5) grants and loan incentives; and 6) 

other sources of revenue. An optimum value model should be described. The Committee expects the report to address the feasibility 

of recovering value from animal waste, the emerging technologies 

and tools available, and physical and economic factors to be considered, and identify potential federal programs which could provide 

incentives and adoption. The Committee provides ERS $1,000,000 

to conduct the report. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
14 

NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS SERVICE

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $174,517,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 163,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 180,794,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +6,277,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +17,794,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), the 

Committee provides an appropriation of $180,794,000, of which 

$45,300,000 is for the Census of Agriculture. The Committee does 

not accept any proposed eliminations or reductions of ongoing activities, including in-season forecasts for non-citrus fruit and tree 

nut crops such as pecans. The Committee provides $2,000,000 to 

expand the Farm Labor Survey. 

Agriculture and Rural Prosperity Initiative.—The Committee appreciates the continued focus on broadband access for rural communities. The Committee provides the requested $2,000,000 for this 

initiative and directs NASS to coordinate their collection efforts in 

partnership with USDA’s Rural Development Programs to ensure 

no duplication of efforts occurs. 

Antibiotic Resistance Efforts.—The Committee includes an additional $2,000,000 to strengthen NASS activities in support of the 

National Animal Health Monitoring System commodity studies and 

the Agricultural Resource Management Survey. This additional 

funding will help expand USDA knowledge and understanding of 

antibiotic use practices and the emergency of resistance. 

Chemical Use Data.—The Committee encourages NASS to continue funding the collection and analysis of chemical use data as 

well as practices such as integrated pest management. In addition, 

the Committee directs NASS to continue collecting Fruit Chemical 

Use data and Vegetable Chemical Use data in alternating years. 

Commercial Floriculture Crops Report.—USDA is directed to 

complete the Commercial Floriculture Crops Report. 

Commodity Survey Staffing.—The Committee directs NASS to 

explore the feasibility of reestablishing a physical presence in Puerto Rico and provide a briefing to the Committee not later than 180 

days after the enactment of this Act. 

Organic Agriculture Survey.—The Committee includes the requested funding to conduct the Organic Agriculture Survey. The 

Committee notes that the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), 

ERS, and NASS are each involved in data collection or reporting 

on organics. The Department is directed to brief the Committees on 

its data collection and reporting efforts on organic agriculture, its 

plan for continuing these efforts in the future, and how these efforts are coordinated across the Department not later than 60 days 

after the enactment of this Act. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
15 

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $1,303,266,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 1,203,491,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1,347,516,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +44,250,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +144,025,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Salaries and Expenses of the Agricultural Research Service 

(ARS), the Committee provides an appropriation of $1,347,516,000. 

The Committee recognizes that many research goals constitute a 

moving target and research objectives may change from year to 

year. The Committee is interested in understanding what research 

programs ARS has determined are mature and what research programs are the highest priority of the agency. The Committee directs ARS to provide a brief to the Committee on its ongoing efforts 

to assess and prioritize research across all its ongoing programs. 

This will help the Committee direct resources to the most impactful 

programs in the future. The Committee does not accept the President’s budget request regarding the reduction or termination of extramural research and expects that extramural research be funded 

at no less than the fiscal year 2019 levels. In addition, the Committee does not accept the proposed termination of research programs or closure of research locations. 

Agricultural Research Facilities.—The Committee directs ARS to 

explore ways in which its labs could be better utilized, in cooperation with non-profits, consortiums, and land grant universities, to 

achieve new scientific goals that benefit the nation’s food and agriculture system. In addition, the Committee encourages ARS to 

work with the entities listed above to develop a smart agriculture 

industry technology roadmap. This research strategy can help 

guide the future development of technology in the agriculture industry and maintain U.S. leadership. 

Alfalfa Research.—The Committee supports an additional 

$1,000,000 above the fiscal year 2019 level for research into alfalfa 

seed and forage systems, which hold the potential to maximize crop 

yields, increase milk production, and improve genetics. 

Animal Research.—The Committee continues to monitor closely 

the compliance by ARS animal research facilities with the requirements of the Animal Welfare Act. The Committee notes that ARS 

has not yet submitted the single report discussing all the violations 

found by APHIS to date that was mandated in the 2019 Act and 

that the first quarterly report since the 2019 Act was enacted failed 

to include any discussion of violations found by APHIS and specific 

actions taken. Thus, the Committee directs ARS to revise the mandated report accordingly. 

Antimicrobial Resistance Action Plan.—The Committee supports 

the research goals of USDA’s Antimicrobial Resistance Action Plan 

to examine the role of nutritional alternative/feed additives containing bioactives and prebiotics as alternatives to increase antibiotic use. This may lead to reduced antibiotic use and boost immune responses in livestock. The Committee directs ARS to provide 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
16 

an update on their role in this effort in its fiscal year 2021 budget 

request. 

Areawide Integrated Pest Management.—The Committee supports ARS’ efforts on areawide integrated pest management and 

encourages continued efforts to design and implement programs 

across the country. 

Big Data.—The Committee supports ARS’ ongoing efforts to 

maximize knowledge extracted from large data sets. The Committee is interested in the development of long-term, durable solutions for the information challenges involving Big Data. 

Biological Collections.—The Committee supports the biological 

collection activities of ARS and its importance to the scientific mission of ARS. 

Bovine Pleuropneumonia.—The Committee is concerned about 

the potential harm to the cattle industry from contagious bovine 

pleuropneumonia and provides $1,000,000 to partner with academia to develop improved diagnostic tests and vaccines for this 

harmful disease. 

Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE).—The Committee supports research aimed at defining BSE inheritance patterns, environmental triggers for BSE susceptibility and/or resistance, and development of preclinical disease testing methods and strategies. 

Cattle Fever Ticks.—The Committee provides not less than $8,000,000 for cattle fever tick critical research needs. The Committee directs ARS to coordinate development of its long-term cattle fever tick research program with APHIS efforts under the Cattle Fever Tick Eradication Program. 

Cercospora Leaf Spot Disease.—The Committee is concerned 

about the prevalence of the cercospora leaf spot, a destructive disease that impacts sugar beet production and results in significant 

losses in root yield and sugar content. The Committee supports the 

work being done by ARS and its continued efforts to develop management solutions to combat cercospora leaf spot disease. 

Citrus Greening Disease Research.—The Committee commends 

ARS’ research efforts on citrus greening disease and encourages the 

agency to continue working to develop methods to reduce transmission and enhance immunity in citrus trees and to work with industry, universities, growers, and other partners to develop effective control mechanisms. The Committee also encourages ARS to 

coordinate its efforts with the Huanglongbing Multi-Agency Coordination group (HLB MAC). 

Coffee Plant Health Initiative.—The Committee supports the research goals of the Coffee Plant Health Initiative. 

Cranberry Research.—The Committee is supportive of the multiuniversity cranberry and blueberry research programs operated in 

partnership with the ARS, and provides an additional $750,000 

above the 2019 level for the purchase of equipment and the hiring 

of additional scientists to meet research needs in disease prevention, pesticide reduction, and water conservation. 

Energy-Water Nexus.—The Committee recognizes the importance 

of the Energy-Water Nexus, and as part of that effort, encourages 

USDA to work with the Department of Energy (DOE) to identify 

research collaborations to develop safe, affordable, deployable, 

energy- and water-efficient technologies for food production platforms that support non-traditional water use. The Committee diVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
17 

rects ARS to work with NIFA and DOE on this initiative and provide to the Committee not later than 180 days after the enactment 

of this Act a report listing ongoing research collaborations between 

ARS and DOE, including its National Laboratories. 

Genetic Oat Research.—The Committee recognizes the potential 

genetic oat research has to improve disease resistance (especially 

rusts and viruses), genetics, increase yields, and develop crop rotation systems that include oats, which will enhance the value of oats 

and provide benefits to producers and consumers. The Committee 

provides an additional $500,000 above the 2019 level to research 

oat germplasm, genomics, phonemics, disease resistance, and enhanced yield. 

Germplasm Enhancement of Maize.—The Committee provides an additional $1,000,000 above the fiscal year 2019 level in support of 

germplasm enhancement of maize projects and encourages continued cooperation between ARS and industry. 

Greenhouse Technology Research.—The Committee recognizes the 

importance of advancing greenhouse technology and exploring its 

capabilities to address the energy and water challenges inherent in 

four-season production systems, beginning in food insecure communities across the country. The Committee encourages ARS to work 

with DOE on greenhouse technology research that explores how to 

integrate ongoing research projects at the various DOE National 

Labs to develop affordable, deployable, and energy and water-efficient food production platforms for undernourished regions of the 

country. By working together, ARS and DOE can bring their respective strengths and resources to designing the most desirable, 

low-cost, and efficient production system. The Committee provides 

an additional $500,000 above the fiscal year 2019 level in continued support of this effort. 

Healthy Soil-Healthy Food-Healthy People.—The Committee supports efforts within ARS to encourage the study of enhanced food 

nutritional quality through the Healthy Soil-Healthy Food-Healthy 

People initiative. 

Hops Research.—The Committee recognizes that the U.S. hops 

industry has experienced unprecedented expansion due to the 

brewing industry’s economic growth over the past decade. To sustain this growth, new varieties of hops are needed to prevent disease and expand production throughout the country. The Committee strongly supports ARS’ ongoing research in hops genomics 

and pathology, and maintains increases from previous years. 

Horticultural Research and Education.—The Committee recognizes the U.S. National Arboretum as a prominent research body 

staffed with highly skilled and dedicated scientists with a history 

of scientific discovery in environmental horticulture. The Committee encourages continued support of the Arboretum as its research and academic programs not only work towards developing 

new approaches in detecting and treating plant disease, but also 

the ability to connect people with plants in a unique and serene environment that enhances the public understanding of agricultural 

plant sciences. 

Human Nutrition Research.—The Committee directs ARS to provide to the Committee not later than 180 days after the enactment 

of this Act a report on the connection between how to advance 

science, policy, and practice for how healthier food enhances overall 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
18 

health, reduces obesity and related co-morbidity, and could lower 

health care costs. 

Livestock Protection.—The Committee recognizes the challenges 

caused by infectious disease problems arising from wildlife-domestic animal agriculture interactions, particularly between domestic 

sheep and wild bighorn sheep. Researchers have recently produced 

an experimental vaccine to protect bighorn populations from disease, but much work is still required. The Committee encourages 

ARS to pursue work to determine the role of domestic sheep in 

causing die-offs of bighorn sheep from respiratory disease and develop methods to reduce transmission and enhance immunity in domestic and bighorn sheep. 

Long-Term Agro-ecosystem Research.—The Committee provides an additional $1,000,000 above fiscal year 2019 for the Long-Term 

Agro-ecosystem Research (LTAR) network. The Committee encourages ARS to fully utilize all the LTAR sites. 

Lower Mississippi River Basin.—The Committee recognizes the 

groundwater problems in the Lower Mississippi River Basin and 

encourages ARS, in collaboration with university research, extension scientists and local stakeholders, to identify gaps in water 

management research and focus efforts on the development of conservation and irrigation techniques to reduce water usage in agriculture production while maintaining crop quality and yield. 

Macadamia Tree Health Initiative.—The Committee provides an additional $500,000 above fiscal year 2019 to support implementation of the Macadamia Tree Health Initiative. 

Marine Aquaculture Seedstock.—The Committee is concerned 

that vital seedstock to support the development of aquaculture in 

federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico will be sourced from foreign 

aquaculture producers. Domestic on-land recirculating aquaculture 

systems and offshore aquaculture are highly capable of producing 

a steady supply of marine fish seedstock to support new offshore 

and aquaculture industries. This includes broodstock acquisition 

and care, spawning, larval culture techniques, and juvenile rearing. 

The Committee provides an additional $500,000 above the fiscal 

year 2019 level for the development effort of aquaculture technology that will ensure a steady supply of warm water marine fish 

seedstock for economic growth of the U.S. aquaculture industry. 

National Agricultural Library.—The Committee encourages ARS 

to maintain a focus on agricultural-related legal issues within the 

National Agricultural Library. The Committee notes that as the agriculture sector faces increasing financial stress, there is a necessity that agriculture-related legal issues be addressed on an increasingly frequent basis. Further, agriculture-related legal issues 

are increasingly complex, and the impact of these legal issues continues to broaden in scope. The Committee recommends that the 

National Agricultural Library play an important role in assisting 

all stakeholders with understanding these issues. 

National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF).—The Committee 

notes that NBAF is approaching construction completion and that 

there are remaining transition and operational capability actions 

necessary before full operational capability can occur. While the 

Committee understands the current research programs at APHIS 

and ARS that will be moved into NBAF once the full transition 

from the Plum Island Animal Disease Center is complete, the ComVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
19 

mittee is not yet aware of how USDA will fill out the rest of NBAF 

with other ongoing or new research activities and any associated 

outyear costs. Therefore, USDA shall submit to the Committees a 

ten-year strategic plan that describes the annual projected research 

and operations costs associated with full utilization of the NBAF 

facility. The plan should include a discussion of how USDA will utilize all available lab space, what ongoing research programs will 

grow, future research priorities that will be housed in NBAF, and 

the associated annual costs of each activity. 

National Soil Dynamics Laboratory.—The Committee directs the 

National Soil Dynamics Laboratory to conduct research and development of technologies to recover phosphorous from manure, transform manure into secondary byproducts and find alternative, environmentally safe and economical usages of manure. The research 

may also explore environmentally safe methods and appropriate 

rates of manure application for growing crops and vegetables and 

the development of alternative feedstock for livestock by raising 

aquatic zooplankton on manure wastewater. 

New Cotton Virus.—The Committee encourages ARS to coordinate with APHIS, academic partners, and industry to conduct research to establish biomarkers, research resistant seed varieties, 

and to develop virus taxonomy and extension management strategies pertaining to aphid control and general cotton management for 

cotton viruses transmitted by the cotton aphid. 

Pickled Vegetables.—The Committee supports ARS’ ongoing research efforts on pickled vegetables. 

Regional Hubs.—The Committee supports the role of USDA’s Climate Hubs and how they supplement ongoing work at ARS. The 

Committee directs ARS to provide a briefing on these ongoing efforts and planned activities in future years. 

Roseau Cane.—The Committee continues to direct ARS to work 

with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and 

stakeholders to develop an integrated management program for 

control of the scale insect pest infestation that is destroying Roseau 

cane in the Mississippi River’s Delta region along the Gulf of Mexico. 

Sclerotinia Initiative.—The Committee is aware of the importance of controlling Sclerotinia in sunflowers, soybeans, canola, edible beans, peanuts, peas, lentils, and chickpeas and encourages 

ARS to continue its support of this initiative. 

Shellfish Research.—The Committee includes an additional 

$500,000 above the fiscal year 2019 level to support additional 

shellfish genetics research staff positions. 

Small Fruits Research.—The Committee supports the tri-state 

research efforts on the development of small fruits and grapes in 

the Pacific Northwest. This research is critical to ensuring continued economic and environmentally-sustainable production for these 

crops. 

Small Grain Genomics.—The Committee supports research on 

small grain genomics to address national genomic and breeding 

needs for U.S. crops to keep small grains and feed as viable crops 

and continue their substantial contributions to the agricultural 

economy. The Committee provides an additional $1,000,000 above 

the fiscal year 2019 level for this research. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
20 

Soft Wheat Falling Numbers Test Research.—The Committee recognizes the emerging crisis surrounding wheat starch degradation, 

as detected by the Hagberg-Perten Falling Numbers Test, and encourages ARS to continue researching the accuracy of the test and 

the environmental, storage, and generic conditions leading to this 

quality loss. 

Spittle Bug.—The Committee encourages ARS to coordinate research efforts with NIFA and APHIS to address the impact of the 

spittle bug. 

Sugarcane Research Program.—The Committee provides an addi- tional $1,000,000 above the fiscal year 2019 level to the Sugarcane 

Research Program to support breeding and pathology research for 

the development of high-yielding, biotic and abiotic stress resistant 

cultivars resistant to emerging pests and diseases that threaten the 

sugarcane industry. 

Tropical and Subtropical Research.—The Committee encourages 

ARS to explore research aimed at supporting tropical and subtropical crops and how this research would fit into ongoing activities. 

Turfgrass Research.—The Committee provides an additional $3,000,000 above the fiscal year 2019 level to conduct research on 

new grasses that require less water, fertilizer, and other inputs; 

genomic sequencing of grasses to identify drought, heat, and pest 

resistance; maximizing the amount of carbon captured by turfgrass 

systems and reducing carbon output through enhanced maintenance systems; and enhancing turfgrass contributions as a foundation for landscape enhancements. 

U.S. Sheep Experiment Station (USSES).—The Committee recognizes the unique and valuable contributions the USSES makes toward increasing the production efficiency of sheep and improving 

sustainable rangeland ecosystems. The Committee also recognizes 

a unique opportunity to expand other research initiatives. The 

Committee encourages ARS to work with various stakeholders regarding efforts to propose mission improvements for the USSES. 

U.S. Wheat and Barley Scab (USWBS).—The Committee recognizes the importance of the research carried out through the 

USWBS Initiative. Fusarium head blight is a major threat to agriculture, inflicting substantial yield and quality losses throughout 

the U.S. The Committee provides an additional $2,000,000 above 

the fiscal year 2019 level in support of the USWBS Initiative. 

Vacant Positions.—The Committee notes that there are still numerous vacant positions at ARS laboratories across the nation. The 

Committee directs ARS to fill vacant positions in order to optimize 

the utilization of ARS laboratory space and ensure that research 

goals can be continually met. Further, the Committee encourages 

ARS to fill these vacancies with permanent employees. 

Water Quality.—The Committee supports ARS’s continued efforts 

to research alternatives to land application of animal manures in 

watersheds where over-application is harming fresh water drinking 

supplies. The Committee also supports ARS efforts to identify alternative collection and processing options for manure to remove 

toxic elements and yield usable material. 

Whitefly.—The Committee recognizes that whiteflies are an 

emerging pest as a result of developing resistance to many pesticides making chemical control difficult and climate variability reVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
21 

sulting in warmer winters and lower seasonal die off. The Committee remains concerned with the whitefly, Bemisia tabaci, epidemic which is severely impacting vegetable and cotton production 

in the Southeast United States. 

Wildfire Smoke Taint Research on Winegrapes.—The Committee 

supports research to identify the compounds responsible for smoke 

taint, establish science-based threshold levels of smoke compounds 

that cause smoke taint, develop mitigation methods to reduce or 

eliminate smoke taint, and study compounds that can act as a barrier between the grapes and smoke compounds. The Committee 

provides $1,500,000 in support of these research efforts. 

BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $381,200,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 50,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 50,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥331,200,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Agricultural Research Service, Buildings and Facilities, the Committee provides an appropriation of $50,000,000 for deferred 

maintenance priorities of existing facilities. 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE

RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $927,649,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 974,715,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1,033,007,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +105,358,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +58,292,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Research and Education Activities, the Committee provides an appropriation of $1,033,007,000. The Committee strongly opposes USDA’s proposal to relocate NIFA and provides no funding 

for such relocation activities. 

Agricultural Research Enhancement Awards.—The Committee 

continues to direct that not less than 15 percent of the competitive 

research grant funds be used for USDA’s agriculture research enhancement awards program, including USDA–EPSCoR, in accordance with 7 U.S.C. 450i. 

Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI).—The Committee strongly supports the AFRI program. The Committee notes 

that projects that characterize protein functionality from crops to 

assess their sustainability for use as alternatives to conventional 

animal products are eligible for competitive awards in the AFRI 

program. In addition, the Committee also notes that research into 

plant-based protein-rich foods for human consumption is also eligible. The Committee supports the continued research goals of the 

AFRI program. 

Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems.—The Committee recognizes the potential that the fields of agroecology and food systems have to increase food security, food self-sufficiency, sustainVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
22 

able economic development, public health, and weather resiliency. 

The Committee supports research focused on agroecology and sustainable food systems and encourages NIFA to explore strategic 

partnerships, interdisciplinary educational programming, applied 

research, policy analysis, outreach, and scholarships in these fields 

as part of its ongoing research efforts. 

Alfalfa Seed and Alfalfa Forage Systems.—The Committee notes 

that research into alfalfa seed and alfalfa forage systems holds the 

potential to increase yields, increase milk production, and improve 

genetics. The Committee supports this research and its continued 

focus on enhancing existing breeding programs that can improve 

yields, harvesting, water conservation, and environmental benefits. 

Blockchain Food Traceability.—The Committee notes the potential of blockchain technology to revolutionize the practice of food 

traceability, tracking food products from origin through every point 

of contact on the journey to the consumer. The Committee is interested in how blockchain technology can be utilized to accurately 

trace food and mitigate the risks associated with food contaminated 

outbreaks and to develop effective strategies for controls. The Committee encourages NIFA to coordinate research to reduce the risk 

of foodborne illness through the application of blockchain technology. 

Childhood Obesity.—The Committee recognizes that NIFA has 

supported important and effective programs that address childhood 

obesity in remote areas and among native and underserved populations. The Committee encourages NIFA to continue funding these 

programs to address childhood obesity prevention and community 

health promotion in remote areas and among native and underserved populations. 

Citrus Disease Research Program.—The 2014 Farm Bill established the Emergency Citrus Disease Research and Extension Program, which is intended to discover and develop tools for early detection, control, and eradication of diseases and pests that threaten 

domestic citrus production and processing. The 2018 Farm Bill reauthorized this program and established the Emergency Citrus 

Disease Research and Development Trust Fund to provide 

$25,000,000 per year in mandatory funding for the program. The 

Committee believes research projects funded under this authority 

should be prioritized based on the critical threat of citrus greening 

and encourages NIFA, to the maximum extent practicable, to follow 

the recommendations of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Advisory Board’s citrus disease subcommittee 

and to collaborate with the HLB MAC group. 

Crop Degradation.—The Committee is aware of crop degradation 

issues harming agricultural producers. For example, starch degradation in Pacific Northwest soft white wheat crops led to significant value losses for producers in late 2016. The Committee encourages NIFA to conduct research through AFRI into soft white 

wheat crop quality loss to mitigate its impact on producers. 

Farm and Ranch Stress Assistance Network.—The Committee 

supports the goals of the Farm and Ranch Stress Assistance Network and includes an increase in funds for the program’s second 

year of operation. 

Grants for Insular Areas.—The Committee recognizes NIFA efforts to strengthen capacity at land-grant institutions in the U.S. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
23 

territories in the areas of instruction, distance education, facilities 

and equipment, and research. The Committee emphasizes the importance of continuing the support for these institutions and provides an increase to help address plant disease and invasive species 

priorities in the territories. 

Grants Promoting K–12 Agriculture Education.—The Committee 

directs USDA to continue to prioritize projects that include a component of connecting stakeholders and employers to students, 

teachers, and schools to facilitate collaboration and communication 

and to ensure stakeholders are connected to students, especially in 

urban areas. 

Livestock and Poultry Waste Research.—The Committee recognizes the benefits of improved methods of managing animal waste 

in livestock and poultry production and encourages NIFA to support research and development of innovative technologies, particularly those that are operationally and economically feasible and 

have a high probability of widespread implementation. 

Multifaceted Tools for Controlling Harmful Algal Blooms and 

Huanglongbing.—The Committee encourages NIFA to continue research into the use of potent antimicrobials through the use of environmentally-friendly integrated nano-delivery systems for the 

purpose of controlling both harmful algal blooms and 

Huanglongbing. 

Research at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Hispanic Serving Institutions.—The Committee encourages NIFA to 

continue to support biotechnology by promoting research at the 

land-grant colleges and universities, including the Historically 

Black Colleges and Universities and Hispanic Serving Institutions, 

and directs NIFA to encourage partnerships among those universities and industry. The Committee directs NIFA to brief the Committee not later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act on 

its efforts. 

Sensor Technologies.—The Committee encourages NIFA to work 

cooperatively with non-profit institutions, consortia, and land-grant 

universities to conduct research on advanced sensor manufacturing 

techniques to improve the agricultural industry. 

Specialty Crop Research Initiative.—The Committee recognizes 

the importance of the Specialty Crop Research Initiative (SCRI) in 

addressing the needs of the specialty crop industry through research and extension activities. The Committee encourages NIFA 

to address winter production, season extension, and high tunnel 

vegetable production as part of ongoing SCRI activities. 

Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE).—The 

Committee notes that energy efficiency is an integral part of sustainable agriculture. The Committee encourages USDA to explore 

how ongoing programs at land grant universities can complement 

energy efficiency operations at farms. The SARE program can serve 

as an important connection between land grant universities and 

farmers and ranchers. The Committee directs USDA to provide a 

briefing not later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act on 

the potential for the SARE program to assist agricultural producers 

in carbon neutral agricultural practices. 

Sustainable Agricultural Systems.—The Committee encourages 

NIFA to continue the Sustainable Agricultural Systems program 

and emphasize, among its priorities and goals, the reduction of bacVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
24 

terial contamination and the increase of nutrition research to inform agricultural systems from production to user. 

Urban Agriculture.—The Committee notes that urban agriculture 

can be a viable solution to support healthier dietary options and 

improve the overall health of residents in urban communities. The 

Committee encourages NIFA to create partnerships and linkages to 

assist urban agricultural production in food insecure and nutrient 

short communities across the nation. In addition, the Committee 

also encourages NIFA to continue to serve as a resource for urban 

and rural farmers to enable collaborations on market production. 

The following table reflects the amounts provided by the Committee: 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE—RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Program/Activity Authorization 2019 

enacted 

2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Hatch Act ................................................................. 7 U.S.C. 361a–i ...................... $259,000 $243,238 $265,000 

McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act ............... 16 U.S.C. 582a through a–7 .. 36,000 28,867 38,000 

Research at 1890 Institutions (Evans-Allen Program).7 U.S.C. 3222 ......................... 58,000 53,817 67,000 

Payments to the 1994 Institutions .......................... 7 U.S.C. 301 note ................... 3,439 3,416 4,000 

Education Grants for 1890 Institutions ................... 7 U.S.C. 3152(b) ..................... 19,336 18,710 23,009 

Scholarships at 1890 Institutions ........................... 7 U.S.C. 3222a ....................... – – – – – – 10,000 

Competitive Facility Modernization Grants .............. 7 U.S.C. 390–390d ................. – – – 50,000 – – – 

Education Grants for Hispanic-Serving Institutions 7 U.S.C. 3241 ......................... 9,219 9,156 20,000 

Education Grants for Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions.7 U.S.C. 3156 ......................... 3,194 – – – 4,000 

Research Grants for 1994 Institutions .................... 7 U.S.C. 301 note ................... 3,801 1,789 3,801 

Capacity Building for Non-Land-Grant Colleges of 

Agriculture.

7 U.S.C. 3319i ........................ 5,000 – – – 5,000 

Grants for Insular Areas .......................................... 7 U.S.C. 3222b–2, 3362 and 

3363.

2,000 – – – 2,700 

Competitive Program for Native Alaskans, Native 

Hawaiians, and Insular Area Institutions.

........................................... – – – 5,000 – – – 

Agriculture and Food Research Initiative ................ 7 U.S.C. 450i(b) ...................... 415,000 500,000 460,000 

Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment ...................... 7 U.S.C. 3151a ....................... 8,000 4,991 9,000 

Veterinary Services Grant Program .......................... 7 U.S.C. 3151b ....................... 3,000 – – – 3,000 

Continuing Animal Health and Disease Research 

Program.

7 U.S.C. 3195 ......................... 4,000 – – – 4,000 

Supplemental and Alternative Crops ....................... 7 U.S.C. 3319d ....................... 1,000 – – – 1,000 

Multicultural Scholars, Graduate Fellowship and 

Institution Challenge Grants.

7 U.S.C. 3152(b) ..................... 9,000 – – – 9,000 

Secondary and 2-year Post-Secondary Education ... 7 U.S.C. 3152(j) ...................... 900 – – – 900 

Aquaculture Centers ................................................. 7 U.S.C. 3322 ......................... 5,000 – – – 5,000 

Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education ... 7 U.S.C. 5811, 5812, 5831, 

and 5832.

37,000 19,009 45,000 

Farm Business Management ................................... 7 U.S.C. 5925f ........................ 2,000 – – – 2,250 

Sun Grant Program .................................................. 7 U.S.C. 8114 ......................... 3,000 – – – 3,000 

Research Equipment Grants .................................... 7 U.S.C. 3310a ....................... – – – – – – 5,000 

Alfalfa and Forage Research Program .................... 7 U.S.C. 5925 ......................... 3,000 – – – 5,000 

Minor Crop Pest Management (IR–4) ...................... 7 U.S.C. 450i(c) ...................... 11,913 – – – 12,000 

Special Research Grants: ......................................... 7 U.S.C. 450i(c).

Global Change/UV Monitoring ......................... ........................................... 1,405 – – – 1,405 

Potato Research .............................................. 7 U.S.C. 450i(c) ...................... 2,750 – – – 3,250 

Aquaculture Research ..................................... 7 U.S.C. 450i(c) ...................... 2,000 – – – 2,000 

Total, Special Research Grants ............. ........................................... 6,155 – – – 6,655 

Necessary Expenses of Research and Education 

Activities: 

Grants Management Systems ......................... ........................................... 7,830 7,424 7,830 

Federal Administration—Other Necessary Expenses............................................ 11,862 29,298 11,862 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
25 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE—RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES— 

Continued 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Program/Activity Authorization 2019 

enacted 

2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Total, Necessary Expenses ..................... ........................................... 19,692 36,722 19,692 

Total, Research and Education 

Activities.

........................................... $927,649 $974,715 $1,033,007 

NATIVE AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS ENDOWMENT FUND

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. ($11,880,000) 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... (11,857,000) 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. (11,880,000) 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +23,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Native American Institutions Endowment Fund, the 

Committee provides $11,880,000. 

EXTENSION ACTIVITIES

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $505,692,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 415,274,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 541,086,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +35,394,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +125,812,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Extension Activities, the Committee provides an appropriation of $541,086,000. 

Rural Health and Safety Education Programs.—The opioid abuse 

epidemic is one of the greatest threats facing rural America today, 

and the Committee supports all efforts to address this problem 

through improved health and safety education and outreach. The 

Committee provides an increase of $500,000 for Rural Health and 

Safety Education Programs to combat opioid abuse in rural communities. 

The following table reflects the amounts provided by the Committee: 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE—EXTENSION ACTIVITIES 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Program/Activity Authorization FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Smith-Lever Act, Section 3(b) and (c) programs and 

Cooperative Extension.

7 U.S.C. 343(b) and (c) and 

208(c) of P.L. 93–471.

$315,000 $299,430 $325,000 

Extension Services at 1890 Institutions .................... 7 U.S.C. 3221 ........................... 48,620 47,310 57,000 

Extension Services at 1994 Institutions .................... 7 U.S.C. 343(b)(3) .................... 6,446 4,416 8,000 

Facility Improvements at 1890 Institutions ............... 7 U.S.C. 3222b ......................... 19,730 – – – 23,529 

Renewable Resources Extension Act .......................... 16 U.S.C. 1671 et. seq. ........... 4,060 – – – 4,060 

Rural Health and Safety Education Programs ........... 7 U.S.C. 2662(i) ....................... 3,000 2,000 3,500 

Food Animal Residue Avoidance Database Program 7 U.S.C. 7642 ........................... 2,500 – – – 2,500 

Women and Minorities in STEM Fields ....................... 7 U.S.C. 5925 ........................... 400 – – – 400 

Food Safety Outreach Program ................................... 7 U.S.C. 7625 ........................... 8,000 4,000 10,000 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
26 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE—EXTENSION ACTIVITIES—Continued 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Program/Activity Authorization FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Food and Ag Service Learning ................................... 7 U.S.C. 7633 ........................... 1,000 – – – 2,000 

Farm and Ranch Stress Assistance Network ............. 7 U.S.C. 5936 ........................... 2,000 – – – 10,000 

Smith-Lever Act, Section 3(d): ................................... 7 U.S.C. 343(d).

Food and Nutrition Education ........................... ................................................... 69,000 55,100 69,000 

Farm Safety and Youth Farm Safety Education 

Programs.

................................................... 4,610 – – – 4,610 

New Technologies for Agricultural Extension .... ................................................... 1,550 – – – 1,550 

Children, Youth, and Families at Risk .............. ................................................... 8,395 – – – 8,395 

Federally Recognized Tribes Extension Program ................................................... 3,039 3,018 3,200 

Total, Section 3(d) .................................... ................................................... 86,594 58,118 86,755 

Necessary Expenses of Extension Activities: .............. ................................................... ................ ................ ................

Agriculture in the K–12 Classroom ................... 7 U.S.C. 3152(j) ....................... 552 – – – 552 

Federal Administration—Other Necessary Expenses for Extension Activities.................................................... 7,790 – – – 7,790 

Total, Necessary Expenses ........................ ................................................... 8,342 – – – 8,342 

Total, Extension Activities ............... ................................................... $505,692 $415,274 $541,086 

INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $38,000,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 1,697,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 40,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +2,000,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +38,303,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Integrated Activities, the Committee provides an appropriation of $40,000,000. 

Crop Protection and Pest Management Program.—The Committee 

supports the development and implementation of areawide integrated pest management (AIPM) projects. The Committee directs 

NIFA to establish within the Crop Protection and Pest Management Program an organizational framework and funding plan to 

implement AIPM projects that are to be planned in coordination 

with ARS, APHIS, and other federal agencies and implemented by 

cross-institutional teams, including farmers, ranchers, and land 

managers, at the local level. 

Food Safety Education.—The Committee supports NIFA’s ongoing efforts to provide research, education, and extension activities 

to reduce the incidence of foodborne illness and provide a safer food 

supply. 

The following table reflects the amounts provided by the Committee. 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE—INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Program/Activity Authorization FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Methyl Bromide Transition Program ........................... 7 U.S.C. 7626 ........................... $2,000 $– – – $2,000 

Organic Transition Program ....................................... 7 U.S.C. 7626 ........................... 6,000 – – – 8,000 

Regional Rural Development Centers ......................... 7 U.S.C. 450i(c) ........................ 2,000 1,697 2,000 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
27 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE—INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES—Continued 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Program/Activity Authorization FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Food and Agriculture Defense Initiative ..................... 7 U.S.C. 3351 ........................... 8,000 – – – 8,000 

Crop Protection/Pest Management Program .............. 7 U.S.C. 7626 ........................... 20,000 – – – 20,000 

Total, Integrated Activities ................................ ................................................... 38,000 1,697 40,000 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MARKETING AND

REGULATORY PROGRAMS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $901,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 800,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 800,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥101,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs, the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$800,000. 

ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $1,011,136,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 981,893,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1,034,011,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +22,875,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +52,118,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Salaries 

and Expenses, the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$1,034,011,000. 

The Committee provides increases for the following programs: 

$8,500,000 for Cattle Health; $3,000,000 for Equine, Cervid, and 

Small Ruminant Health; $2,000,000 for Veterinary Biologics; 

$4,200,000 for Veterinary Diagnostics; $1,000,000 for Zoonotic Disease Management; $1,000,000 for Field Crop and Rangeland Ecosystems Pests; $295,000 for Horse Protection; $1,000,000 for Plant 

Protection Methods Development; $1,380,000 for Wildlife Damage 

Management; and $500,000 for Specialty Crop Pests. 

Within the amount included for Specialty Crop Pests, the Committee includes $63,640,000 for fruit fly exclusion and detection; 

$61,000,000 for citrus health, including $3,000,000 for the 

Huanglongbing Multi-Agency Coordination efforts; $21,100,000 for 

the glassy-winged sharpshooter; $6,318,000 for the pale cyst nematode; $6,500,000 for the light brown apple moth; $6,600,000 for the 

European grapevine moth; and $12,000,000 for spotted lanternfly. 

The following table reflects the amounts provided by the Committee: 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
28 

(Dollars in Thousands) 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Animal Health Technical Services .............................................................. $37,857 $44,857 $37,857 

Aquatic Animal Health ................................................................................ 2,253 2,253 2,253 

Avian Health ............................................................................................... 62,840 62,840 62,840

Cattle Health ............................................................................................... 96,500 96,500 105,000 

Equine, Cervid, and Small Ruminant Health ............................................. 20,800 16,500 23,800 

National Veterinary Stockpile ...................................................................... 5,725 5,725 5,725 

Swine Health ............................................................................................... 24,800 19,753 24,800

Veterinary Biologics .................................................................................... 16,417 16,417 18,417 

Veterinary Diagnostics ................................................................................ 50,140 49,230 54,340 

Zoonotic Disease Management ................................................................... 16,523 15,744 17,523 

Subtotal, Animal Health .................................................................... 333,855 329,819 352,555 

Agricultural Quarantine Inspection (Appropriated) .................................... 32,330 31,330 32,330 

Cotton Pests ................................................................................................ 11,520 7,000 11,520

Field Crop & Rangeland Ecosystems Pests ............................................... 11,826 7,809 12,826 

Pest Detection ............................................................................................. 27,446 27,446 27,446

Plant Protection Methods Development ...................................................... 20,686 20,686 21,686 

Specialty Crop Pests ................................................................................... 186,013 176,843 186,513 

Tree & Wood Pests ...................................................................................... 60,000 56,000 60,000 

Subtotal, Plant Health ....................................................................... 349,821 327,114 352,321 

Wildlife Damage Management .................................................................... 108,376 108,376 109,756 

Wildlife Services Methods Development ..................................................... 18,856 18,856 18,856 

Subtotal, Wildlife Services ................................................................. 127,232 127,232 128,612 

Animal & Plant Health Regulatory Enforcement ........................................ 16,224 16,224 16,224 

Biotechnology Regulatory Services ............................................................. 18,875 18,875 18,875 

Subtotal, Regulatory Services ............................................................ 35,099 35,099 35,099 

Contingency Fund ....................................................................................... 470 470 470 

Emergency Preparedness & Response ........................................................ 40,966 40,966 40,966 

Subtotal, Emergency Management .................................................... 41,436 41,436 41,436 

Agriculture Import/Export ............................................................................ 15,599 15,599 15,599 

Overseas Technical & Trade Operations .................................................... 24,115 22,115 24,115 

Subtotal, Safe Trade .......................................................................... 39,714 37,714 39,714 

Animal Welfare ............................................................................................ 31,310 30,810 31,310 

Horse Protection .......................................................................................... 705 705 1,000 

Subtotal, Animal Welfare ................................................................... 32,015 31,515 32,310 

APHIS Information Technology Infrastructure ............................................. 4,251 4,251 4,251 

Physical/Operational Security ..................................................................... 5,146 5,146 5,146 

Rent and DHS Payments ............................................................................ 42,567 42,567 42,567 

Subtotal, Agency Management .......................................................... 51,964 51,964 51,964 

Total, APHIS S&E Direct Appropriation ..................................... $1,011,136 $981,893 $1,034,011 

Agriculture Quarantine Inspections.—The Committee recognizes 

that prevention of infestations of pests and diseases is much more 

cost effective than subsequent control or eradication. This is an important Federal responsibility and the Committee provides 

$32,330,000 for the agricultural quarantine inspections (AQI) function, including pre-departure and interline inspections. The Committee does not adopt the President’s proposal to move to a user 

fee system. 

Animal Care Program.—The Committee is deeply concerned by 

how the Animal Care program is being managed. In particular, it 

has employed mechanisms such as ‘‘teachable moments’’ to avoid 

documenting violations of the laws it enforces. To address these 

concerns, the Committee directs Animal Care to immediately reVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
29 

quire all its inspectors to cite every observed violation at any visit 

to a regulated entity. 

Animal Surveillance.—The Committee supports efforts to advance the development of improved animal surveillance practices 

that may lead to reduced and tailored antibiotic use and improved 

immune responses in livestock. The Committee encourages USDA 

to partner with organizations to continue to monitor animals, and 

collect and maintain information relevant to public health and livestock-management practices. 

Antimicrobial Resistance.—The Committee supports efforts to address potential gaps in farm-specific antimicrobial resistance data. 

At the same time, the agency is reminded that any information collected on-farm should be done through the National Animal Health 

Monitoring System (NAHMS), keeping respondents anonymous and 

ensuring that all information collected is protected from release or 

distribution in a manner that could identify an individual respondent. 

Asian Longhorned Beetle (ALB).—Within the amount provided 

for Tree and Wood Pests, the Committee maintains funding and 

cost share rates for ALB at the 2019 level. 

Biological Control Program.—The Committee provides an increase of $1,000,000 for the Biological Control Program within 

Plant Protection Methods Development to continue efforts to suppress pest populations. 

Cattle Health.—The Committee provides an increase of 

$8,500,000 for Cattle Health to continue to fund related to eradication of fever ticks for livestock and wildlife hosts including but 

not limited to research, data management, infrastructure, and 

treatment. The Committee is concerned that the cattle fever tick 

quarantine area is expanding despite efforts to constrain their 

spread. To prevent movement of livestock and game animals outside of the quarantined or high-risk premises, the Committee encourages APHIS to use available funds for a cost-share program for 

the construction and repair of livestock or game fencing on private 

lands. The Committee directs USDA, in conjunction with State Animal Health Commissions, to develop a strategy to exclude wildlife 

from areas at highest risk of tick spread and identify areas that 

qualify for funds within these areas. APHIS is requested to submit 

a report to the Committee on its efforts within 60 days of the date 

of enactment of this Act. 

The Committee also notes that there are large dense stands of 

non-native carrizo cane occupy the banks and floodplains of the Rio 

Grande River, providing favorable habitat for agriculturally-damaging cattle fever ticks and threatening water supplies for agriculture due to its high evapo-transpiration capacity. The Committee understands APHIS has been working with ARS on biological controls and has received funds from the U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) for mechanical controls. The Committee 

provides $5,000,000 for APHIS to continue to coordinate with ARS, 

CBP, Department of the Interior, the International Boundary and 

Water Commission, the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation 

Board, and other stakeholders on control efforts. The Committee directs APHIS to provide a report on the performance of this program within 60 days of the enactment of this Act. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
30 

Center for Plant Health Science and Technology Laboratory.—The 

Committee is concerned about the major threat to pistachios, almonds, and walnuts from the navel orangeworm. The annual loss 

caused by this pest is in excess of $500,000,000. The Committee directs APHIS to develop a cost estimate for the creation of a pilot 

program involving the navel orangeworm rearing and sterile insect 

technology. This pilot program would mirror the work conducted by 

APHIS at this facility which led to the eradication of the pink 

bollworm. The Committee directs APHIS to provide the Committees with the estimate no later than 90 days after enactment. 

Center for Veterinary Biologics.—The Committee provides an increase of $2,000,000 for facility improvements and additional staff 

at the Center for Veterinary Biologics. 

Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD).—Funding is continued in 

Equine, Cervid, and Small Ruminant Health for the national, voluntary Herd Certification Program (HCP) and regulations for the 

interstate movement of farmed or captive deer, elk, and moose. The 

cervid industry continues to participate in the agency’s HCP, which 

supports the domestic and international marketability of U.S. 

cervid herds. Funds are to be used for a combination of surveillance, research, and indemnification for culling herds where CWD 

infection has been found. Currently the only reliable test is a brain 

biopsy. The agency is encouraged to utilize resources to help speed 

up the development of a live test for CWD that would greatly decrease the need for indemnity. The Committee encourages APHIS 

to maintain its commitment to the HCP and the cervid industry, 

and directs the agency to spend no less than $7,000,000 for cervid 

health activities. Within the funds provided, the agency should consider indemnity payments if warranted. 

The Committee is concerned about the impacts of chronic wasting disease on free-ranging deer, and the potential threats of the 

disease on the future of free-ranging deer populations, hunting and 

rural economies. Of the amount for cervid health activities, 

$3,000,000 is provided for appropriate assistance to state wildlife 

agencies, including conducting CWD surveillance and field programs, to assess and minimize the impacts of CWD on free-ranging 

deer. 

The Committee also supports continued efforts under Wildlife 

Services Methods Development to research the predominant pathways and mechanisms of the transmission of chronic wasting disease in wild, captive, and farmed populations of cervids in North 

America, including identifying significant gaps in the current scientific knowledge regarding transmission pathways. In carrying 

out this research APHIS may consult, partner, or contract with the 

ARS, the U.S. Geological Survey, the National Academy of 

Sciences, and other public and private entities. 

Citrus Health Response Program (CHRP).—CHRP is a national 

effort to protect the U.S. industry from the ravages of invasive 

pests and diseases. These funds are designed to partner with state 

departments of agriculture and industry groups to address the 

challenges of citrus pests and diseases. In addition to the funds 

provided in this account, the Committee encourages APHIS to utilize the funds available in the Plant Pest and Disease Management 

and Disaster Prevention Programs account to the greatest extent 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
31 

possible in an attempt to sustain the economic viability of the citrus industry. 

Cogongrass.—The Committee continues to provide $2,000,000 for 

APHIS to partner with state departments of agriculture and forestry commissions in states considered to be the epicenter of infestations, to assist with control and treatment of cogongrass in order 

to slow the advancing front of this invasive plant-pest species and 

its impact on forest productivity, wildlife habitat, and private landowners. 

Cotton Pests.—The bill maintains funding for the joint Cotton 

Pests Program at the 2019 level. Given the eradication of the pink 

bollworm, all resources in the joint cotton pests program can now 

be dedicated to the eradication of the boll weevil, thus effectively 

increasing funding for this pest by almost $4,000,000. The Committee encourages APHIS and the cotton industry to make every 

effort to ensure the boll weevil does not re-infest areas of the U.S. 

where it has been successfully eradicated. The Boll Weevil Eradication Program, an outstanding example of a public-private partnership, has successfully eradicated the boll weevil from all U.S. 

cotton-producing regions except for the extreme lower parts of 

Texas in the Lower Rio Grande Valley (LRGV) bordering 

Tamaulipas, Mexico. Growers in the LRGV, with assistance from 

APHIS and the support of the entire industry, continue to conduct 

an active program to eradicate the boll weevil. The LRGV serves 

as the barrier between boll weevil infested areas of Mexico and boll 

weevil-free areas of the United States. 

Disease Surveillance.—Recognizing the importance of disease 

surveillance among APHIS-inspected animals, the Committee encourages APHIS to continue to explore partnerships with veterinary medicine programs to establish a formal disease surveillance 

network. 

Emergency Outbreaks.—The Committee continues to include specific language relating to the availability of funds to address emergencies related to the arrest and eradication of contagious or infectious diseases or pests of animals, poultry or plants. The Committee expects the Secretary to continue to use the authority provided in this bill to transfer funds from the CCC for the arrest and 

eradication of animal and plant pests and diseases that threaten 

American agriculture. By providing funds in this account, the Committee is enhancing, not replacing, the use of CCC funding for 

emergency outbreaks. 

Emergency Preparedness and Response.—The Committee continues to provide funding for the Animal Care Program to coordinate with the Federal Emergency Management Agency on the National Response Plan and to support state and local governments’ 

efforts to plan for protection of people with animals and incorporate 

lessons learned from previous disasters. 

Fresh Produce Pest Identification.—The Committee is aware that 

when a local identifier cannot identify a plant pest or pathogen 

found within produce at a Port of Entry, the specimen is sent to 

a USDA national specialist in one of three offices on the East 

Coast. This may cause fresh produce to wait up to five days for an 

insect identification. The Committee directs APHIS to use the appropriate resources to expedite identifications and reduce the wait 

time for fresh produce. The Committee directs the agency to submit 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
32 

a report to the Committees on Appropriations on its efforts within 

60 days of enactment. 

Fruit Fly Facility.—The Committee understands that APHIS is 

undertaking a review of the facility needs of the Mediterranean 

Fruit Fly Preventive Release Program located at the Los Alamitos 

National Guard Air Force Base and requests a report upon completion of the review. 

Green Coffee Imports.—The Committee encourages APHIS to 

complete a trial program for allowing the import of green coffee 

beans into Puerto Rico by the end of fiscal year 2020 and move to 

a decision as expeditiously as possible on a rulemaking regarding 

the import of green coffee beans into Puerto Rico. 

HLB MAC Group.—The Committee recognizes the significant 

economic impact of this disease on the citrus industry, which is especially acute in Florida and a growing concern in both Texas and 

California. The Committee also understands that growers are requesting the right to try treatments that have begun to show success in early stages of testing. The Committee encourages the HLB 

MAC group to explore and identify new methods to expedite the delivery of promising treatments directly to willing growers, regardless of the phase of observation the treatment is at within the research pipeline. Finally, the Committee expects any funds which 

are redirected from existing HLB MAC projects be repurposed to 

other priority HLB MAC projects that are showing promising results in order to ensure these critical funds remain committed to 

help facilitate the design and implementation of the rapid delivery 

pathway to growers. 

Huanglongbing Emergency Response.—The Committee maintains 

the increased funding levels for HLB emergency response within 

the Specialty Crop Pests line item. The Committee encourages 

APHIS to allocate sufficient resources in order to continue vital 

management, control, and associated activities to address citrus 

greening. The disease, for which there is no cure, has caused a reduction in citrus production by over 60 percent since 2007 in Florida alone. All citrus producing counties in Texas are under quarantine, and California has found the Asian Citrus Psyllid, the vector of the disease, in some backyard trees. The spread of this disease has called into question the future of the domestic citrus industry, costing thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in lost revenue. The agency is encouraged to support priorities and strategies 

identified by the HLB MAC group which will benefit the citrus industry. The agency should appropriately allocate resources based 

on critical need and maximum effect to the citrus industry. 

The Committee maintains $3,000,000 from fiscal year 2019 for 

citrus health to support priorities and strategies identified by the 

HLB MAC group. The HLB MAC is focused on solutions to help the 

citrus industry, and the cooperative nature of federal, state, and industry representatives in this group is expected to result in the development of tools and techniques to address this devastating disease. The MAC has been an effective resource in helping growers 

explore new possible solutions. The agency should appropriately allocate resources based on critical need and maximum impact to the 

citrus industry. These citrus health activities directly protect citrus 

production on approximately 765,000 acres in the United States 

worth more than $11 billion in total. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
33 

In and Out Bound Market Access Report.—The Committee awaits 

the report from APHIS on U.S. out-bound and foreign in-bound agricultural market access. 

Inspection Reports.—The bill provides $31,310,000 for the Animal 

Welfare program in order to ensure that minimum standards of 

care and treatment are provided for certain animals bred for commercial sale, used in research, transported commercially, or exhibited to the public. The funding level supports the agreement between APHIS and ARS, under which APHIS conducts compliance 

inspections of ARS facilities to ensure compliance with the regulations and standards of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA). The Committee continues to direct APHIS to transmit to the Committees all 

inspection reports involving ARS facilities, including pre-compliance inspections. These facilities involve federal funds over which 

this Committee has oversight responsibilities. APHIS is directed to 

include every violation its inspectors find and never to frustrate the 

Committee’s oversight activities by using so-called ‘‘teachable moments’’ or other means of not reporting ARS facility violations. 

National Animal Health Laboratory Network (NAHLN).—The 

laboratories within the NAHLN network are on the frontline for 

detection of newly identified and reemerging animal diseases. 

NAHLN laboratories provide a critical contribution to animal and 

public health. The bill continues to provide funding for NAHLN 

through both APHIS and NIFA at approximately $12,000,000 and 

$4,300,000, respectively, resulting in a total investment of no less 

than $16,300,000 for fiscal year 2020. This amount is in addition 

to mandatory funding provided through the 2018 Farm Bill for Animal Disease Prevention and Management. The Committee encourages the Department to provide robust funding from the 2018 

Farm Bill for NAHLN. These laboratories were invaluable during 

the 2015 outbreak of HPAI, which significantly increased testing 

needs. At the same time, NAHLN laboratories must also continue 

testing for other animal diseases of concern. 

National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF).—The bill provides an increase of $4,200,000 for NBAF as requested. The Committee includes additional guidance under ARS. 

National Clean Plant Network (NCPN).—The Committee continues to support robust funding for the National Clean Plant Network (NCPN). The Committee understands APHIS is working with 

the berries industry and other entities to establish a berries clean 

plant laboratory. Of the funds made available for NCPN, appropriate consideration shall be provided for equipment purchases and 

technical support to ensure the establishment of a redundant diagnostic and therapy center for berries. 

National Honey Bee Disease Survey Report.—The Committee continues funding the survey at the 2019 level. Since 2009, a national 

survey of honey bee pests and diseases has been funded annually 

by APHIS along with other federal and non-federal partners to document which bee diseases, parasites, or pests of honey bees are 

present and/or likely absent in the U.S. This information will help 

place current and future epidemiological studies in context and 

thus may indirectly help investigations of emerging conditions. 

Pacific Ants.—Congress encourages APHIS, ARS, and the Forest 

Service to lead the revision of the Pacific Ants Prevention Plan, in 

collaboration with U.S. and international partners. The plan should 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
34 

include (1) research; (2) the development of technologies and methodologies for prevention, eradication and control of invasive ants; 

and (3) the collaborative implementation of projects to prevent, 

monitor and control invasive ants in affected Pacific islands. 

Pale Cyst Nematode Eradication.—The Committee includes funding to maintain resources for the pale cyst nematode eradication 

program at the 2019 level in order to continue with successful efforts to eradicate this pest. If left untreated, this pest could spread, 

affecting other crops. 

Protecting Animals with Shelter Grants Program.—The Committee provides $2,000,000 for the program. It also directs the Secretary of Agriculture to immediately begin consultations, and enter 

into any necessary agreements, to establish during fiscal year 2020 

the requirements for grant application and grant awards, pursuant 

to section 12502 of the 2018 Farm Bill, to provide emergency and 

transitional shelter options for domestic violence survivors with 

companion animals. 

Roseau Cane.—The Committee remains concerned with the 

invasive species-scale insect pest that is destroying Roseau cane in 

the Mississippi River Delta region along the Gulf of Mexico. The 

Committee directs APHIS to continue to work with ARS and stakeholders and provide no less than $2,000,000 within Field Crop and 

Rangeland Ecosystems Pests to further develop an integrated management program for control of the Roseau cane scale insect pest 

infestation. 

Salmonid Pathogens.—The Committee recognizes that viral 

pathogens pose a significant threat to the cultivation of salmonids 

for hatchery and aquaculture production. The Committee is aware 

that multiple state and federal agencies collect information on fish 

pathogens, but there is currently no strategic national approach to 

sharing, managing, and utilizing the data such that it is both accessible and useful to private, tribal, state or federal agencies. 

Therefore, the Committee recommends that APHIS actively engage 

with federal, state, tribal, and private stakeholders to establish a 

strategic national approach to study, monitor, and track the transmission of such pathogens in order to reduce the threat posed to 

existing salmonid production operations. 

Spotted Lanternfly.—The Committee continues to be concerned 

about the recent Spotted Lanternfly outbreak and maintains the 

increase of $7,000,000 provided for fiscal year 2019 to support efforts in combatting this pest. 

Wildlife Services.—The Committee provides a total of 

$128,612,000 for Wildlife Damage Management and Wildlife Services Methods Development, including continued funding for the National Scrapie Eradication Program and the Beaver Management 

Assistance Program. In addition, the Committee continues funding 

provided in prior years and provides APHIS authority to obtain 

aviation assets, including rotary wing assets, necessary for mission 

critical activities such as conducting surveillance, controlling, or 

eradicating destructive pests or wildlife. 

The Committee is aware of the economic loss sunflower growers 

can incur due to blackbird infestations, and encourages Wildlife 

Services to do further research into the use of bird repellents to 

minimize blackbird depredation. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
35 

The Committee is aware that Wildlife Services has worked with 

landowners to deploy nonlethal strategies, e.g., fladry, electric fencing, and livestock guardian dogs, to reduce predator depredation on 

livestock. The bill provides an increase of $1,380,000 for Wildlife 

Services to hire personnel exclusively to: 1) promote and implement 

nonlethal livestock-predator conflict deterrence techniques in selected states; and 2) assist in providing training in these techniques to agricultural producers, landowners, and other agency personnel in collaboration with the National Wildlife Research Center. 

This would include research on monitoring methods for efficacy of 

non-lethal control methods implemented to reduce predation. 

BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $3,175,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 2,709,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 3,175,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +466,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Buildings and Facilities of the Animal and Plant Health In- spection Service, the Committee provides $3,175,000. 

AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE

MARKETING SERVICES

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $159,095,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 115,143,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 182,888,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +23,793,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +67,745,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Marketing Services of the Agricultural Marketing Service 

(AMS), the Committee provides an appropriation of $182,888,000. 

This amount includes increases of $500,000 to continue the Organic 

Production and Market Data Initiative and $3,906,000 to fund the 

National Organic Standards program at the authorized level of 

$18,000,000. The bill also includes $5,400,000 for the Farmers Market and Local Food Promotion Program authorized under the Local 

Agriculture Market Program (LAMP) in the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018. This amount is in addition to $50,000,000 of 

mandatory funds available for LAMP in fiscal year 2020. The bill 

maintains the $1,000,000 increase provided in fiscal year 2019 for 

the Acer Access and Development Program. The bill provides 

$16,496,000 for the Hemp Production Program, as discussed further below. The bill does not continue funding for rural infrastructure analyses or dairy business innovation initiatives. 

The following table reflects the amounts provided by the Committee: 

(Dollars in Thousands) 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY2020 

Estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Market News ....................................................................................................................... $33,659 $28,927 $33,659 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
36 

(Dollars in Thousands) 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY2020 

Estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Shell Egg Surveillance ........................................................................................................ 2,568 1,930 2,568 

Standardization ................................................................................................................... 5,118 4,984 5,118 

Federal Seed Act Program .................................................................................................. 2,325 2,068 2,325 

Country of Origin Labeling ................................................................................................. 4,744 3,752 4,744 

Pesticide Data Program ...................................................................................................... 15,073 14,971 15,073 

National Organic Standards ............................................................................................... 14,094 12,032 18,000 

Organic Production & Market Data Initiative ............................................................ ................ ................ 500 

Transportation & Market Development ............................................................................... 10,175 7,183 9,175 

Farmers Market and Local Food Promotion ............................................................... ................ ................ 5,400 

National Bioengineered Food Disclosure ............................................................................ 2,000 993 2,000 

GSA Rent & DHS Security ................................................................................................... 1,277 1,268 1,268 

Acer Access and Development ............................................................................................ 4,000 0 4,000 

Packers & Stockyards ......................................................................................................... 23,281 22,975 23,281 

Grain Regulatory ................................................................................................................. 20,201 0 20,201 

US Warehouse Activities ..................................................................................................... 10,506 14,060 10,506 

International Food Procurement .......................................................................................... 8,574 0 8,574 

Dairy Business Innovation Initiatives ................................................................................. 1,500 0 0

Hemp Production Program .................................................................................................. 0 0 16,496 

Total Marketing Services ........................................................................................... $159,095 $115,143 $182,888 

Bioengineered Food Disclosure Regulations.—The Committee is 

concerned that elements of the Bioengineered Food Disclosure final 

rule may lead to uncertainty and confusion among the food value 

chain and in consumer understanding of disclosures provided under 

the final rule. The Committee directs AMS to continue to work collaboratively, with the involvement of industry stakeholders, to 

promptly address concerns raised so that manufacturers may begin 

adhering to the rule. 

Farmers Markets.—Farmers markets represent a valuable connection between farmers and consumers by offering fresh, healthy 

food while stimulating the local economy. The number of farmers 

markets has increased dramatically over the last decades; however, 

there is a recent disturbing trend in the rising number of market 

closures, especially in rural communities. The Committee directs 

AMS to provide a report within 180 days of enactment on the status of the Nation’s farmers markets in rural areas and actions 

USDA can take to help these markets remain economically viable. 

Hemp Production Program.—The Committee understands that 

USDA is working on implementing the Hemp Production Program 

as authorized by the 2018 Farm Bill and encourages the Department to use existing resources to issue regulations as soon as possible. The bill includes $16,496,000 for implementation costs in fiscal year 2020. The Department is directed to provide the Committee with frequent status updates on the progress of implementation. 

National Organic Program (NOP).—There continues to be concern about fraud in the organic program, especially among imports. 

Therefore, the Committee provides an increase of $3,906,000 to 

fund NOP at the authorized level of $18,000,000 to strengthen enforcement of organic labeling, including a continued focus on fraud 

detection and oversight. AMS is directed to continue providing the 

Committee with timely updates on investigations of fraud in organic markets. 

Origin of Livestock Regulations.—The Committee is concerned by 

USDA’s delay in issuing final guidance regarding the origin of orVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
37 

ganic livestock. In 2015, USDA issued a proposed rule to clarify 

regulations around the origin of livestock while still allowing a onetime transition of a conventional herd to organic. While there was 

widespread support from the organic industry, USDA did not issue 

a final rule. This has caused a lack of uniform enforcement by 

USDA and direct economic harm for organic farmers. The bill requires USDA to issue a final rule within 180 days of enactment of 

this Act. 

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

2019 limitation .................................................................................... ($61,227,000) 

2020 budget limitation ....................................................................... (60,982,000) 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. (61,227,000) 

Comparison: 

2019 limitation ............................................................................ – – – 

2020 budget limitation ................................................................ +245,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

The Committee provides a limitation of $61,227,000 on Administrative Expenses of the Agricultural Marketing Service. 

FUNDS FOR STRENGTHENING MARKETS, INCOME, AND SUPPLY

(SECTION 32)

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. ($20,705,000) 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... (20,705,000) 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. (20,705,000) 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Marketing Agreements and Orders Program, the Com- mittee provides a transfer from Section 32 funds of $20,705,000. 

The following table reflects the status of this fund: 

ESTIMATED TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE AND BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD FISCAL YEARS 2019–2020 

(Dollars in Thousands) 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Appropriation (30% of Customs Receipts) ................................................ $10,624,198 $15,123,425 $15,123,425 

Less Transfers: 

Food and Nutrition Service ................................................................ ¥9,092,218 ¥13,561,425 ¥13,561,425 

Commerce Department ...................................................................... ¥157,980 ¥158,000 ¥158,000 

Total Transfers .......................................................................... ¥9,250,198 ¥13,719,425 ¥13,719,425 

Budget Authority, Farm Bill ........................................................................ 1,374,000 1,404,000 1,404,000 

Appropriations Temporarily Reduced-Sequestration .......................... ¥74,400 0 ¥72,216 

Budget Authority, Appropriations Act ....................................... 1,299,600 1,404,000 1,331,784 

Less Obligations: 

Child Nutrition Programs (Entitlement Commodities) ....................... 485,000 485,000 485,000 

State Option Contract ........................................................................ 5,000 5,000 5,000 

Removal of Defective Commodities ................................................... 2,500 2,500 2,500 

Disaster Relief ................................................................................... 5,000 5,000 5,000 

Additonal Fruits, Vegetables, and Nuts Purchases ........................... 206,000 206,000 206,000 

Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program .................................................. 176,000 180,000 180,000 

Estimated Future Needs .................................................................... 363,542 463,942 391,726 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
38 

ESTIMATED TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE AND BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD FISCAL YEARS 2019– 

2020—Continued 

(Dollars in Thousands) 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Total Commodity Procurement .................................................. 1,243,042 1,347,442 1,275,226 

Administrative Funds: 

Commodity Purchase Support ............................................................ 35,853 35,853 35,853 

Marketing Agreements and Orders .................................................... 20,705 20,705 20,705 

Total, Administrative Funds ...................................................... 56,558 56,558 56,558 

Total Obligations ................................................................................ $1,299,600 $1,404,000 $1,331,784 

Cranberry Purchases.—The Committee remains concerned about 

low cranberry commodity prices and associated farm losses that US 

cranberry producers have incurred over the past three years. Retaliatory tariffs in major export markets coupled with high yields 

across major producing areas have negatively impacted efforts by 

the industry and USDA to expand new markets and address current pressures on farm income. The Committee commends the recent actions taken by USDA in the approval of a volume regulation 

implemented in 2018–19 as well as purchases under USDA’s trade 

mitigation program. The Committee expects USDA to continue 

evaluating the cranberry industry’s market conditions to determine 

if Section 32 purchases are warranted. 

PAYMENTS TO STATES AND POSSESSIONS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $1,235,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 1,109,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1,235,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +126,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Payments to States and Possessions, the Committee provides 

an appropriation of $1,235,000. 

LIMITATION ON INSPECTION AND WEIGHING SERVICES EXPENSES

2019 limitation .................................................................................... ($55,000,000) 

2020 budget limitation ....................................................................... (80,000,000) 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. (55,000,000) 

Comparison: 

2019 limitation ............................................................................ – – – 

2020 budget limitation ................................................................ ¥25,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

The Committee includes a limitation on inspection and weighing services expenses of $55,000,000. 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR FOOD SAFETY

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $800,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 800,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 800,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
39 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety, the Committee provides an appropriation of $800,000. 

FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $1,049,344,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 1,045,320,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1,054,344,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +5,000,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +9,024,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), the Com- mittee provides an appropriation of $1,054,344,000. 

The following table reflects the Committee’s recommendations for 

fiscal year 2020: 

FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Recommendation 

Federal Inspection ............................................................................................................................................ $936,324 

Public Health Data Communication Infrastructure System ............................................................................. 34,580 

International Food Safety and Inspection ........................................................................................................ 16,758 

State Food Safety and Inspection .................................................................................................................... 66,682 

Total, Food Safety and Inspection Service .............................................................................................. $1,054,344 

Corrosive chemicals.—The Committee remains concerned over reports that meat and poultry workers are being harmed by corrosive 

chemicals, such as peroxyacetic acid. The Committee urges the 

USDA, FDA, and EPA to enter into a memorandum of understanding concerning plant worker and FSIS employee safety and 

approval of antimicrobials in the meat and poultry industry. 

Humane Methods of Slaughter.—FSIS shall ensure that inspectors hired with funding previously specified for enforcement under 

the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act focus their attention on 

overseeing compliance with humane handling rules for live animals 

as they arrive and are offloaded and handled in pens, chutes, and 

stunning areas, and that all inspectors receive robust national 

training, including on the Regulatory Essentials, Humane Animal 

Tracking System, and Public Health Information System. The 

Committee directs the agency to conduct an annual program evaluation for its humane handling inspections program that includes 

document review, field staff surveys, and monitoring to assess the 

degree of consistency and objectivity of implementation of the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act by all levels of inspection staff. 

Tribally-raised Buffalo and Bison.—The Committee urges FSIS 

to enhance its efforts to work with tribes to set up voluntary, feefor-service programs for the slaughter of tribally raised buffalo/ 

bison. In doing so, FSIS should work with the Tribal Council and 

make the Council aware of such opportunities as mobile slaughter 

and any trade associations that may be able to assist the tribe in 

qualifying for inspection and starting its operations. In addition, 

the Committee expects a report to the Committee within 90 days 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
40 

of enactment on the projected impact to the agency if Congress 

were to determine that buffalo/bison were an amenable species 

under the Federal Meat Inspection Act. 

TITLE II 

FARM PRODUCTION AND CONSERVATION PROGRAMS 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR FARM PRODUCTION AND

CONSERVATION

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $901,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 875,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 901,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +26,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Under Secretary for Farm Production and 

Conservation (FPAC), the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$901,000. 

Information Technology Briefing.—The Committee directs the 

Under Secretary to provide briefings during fiscal year 2020 on the 

development and combination of information technology systems, 

specifically farm program modernization and the latest updates to 

the farmers.gov website. 

Livestock Indemnity Payments for Adverse Weather.—The Committee is aware that millions of farmed animals die each year due 

to the effects of adverse weather. Extreme weather events are occurring at increased frequency, putting additional livestock at risk. 

The Committee recognizes the importance of disaster planning and 

encourages the Department to work with producers that want to 

voluntarily develop disaster plans to prevent livestock deaths and 

injuries. 

FARM PRODUCTION AND CONSERVATION BUSINESS CENTER

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $216,350,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 206,530,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 206,530,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥9,820,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Farm Production and Conservation Business Center, the 

Committee provides an appropriation of $206,530,000. 

FARM SERVICE AGENCY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriation Transfer from program accounts Total, FSA S&E 

2019 appropriation ................................................................... $1,081,655,000 ($293,522,000) $1,375,177,000 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
41 

Appropriation Transfer from program accounts Total, FSA S&E 

2020 budget estimate .............................................................. 1,012,008,000 (294,567,000) 1,306,575,000 

Provided in the bill ................................................................... 1,122,837,000 (293,522,000) 1,416,359,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation .......................................................... +41,182,000 – – – +41,182,000 

2020 budget estimate ..................................................... +110,829,000 ¥1,045,000 +109,784,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Salaries and Expenses of the Farm Service Agency (FSA), the Committee provides an appropriation of $1,122,837,000 and 

transfers of $293,522,000 for a total program level of 

$1,416,359,000. The Committee accepts the proposed information 

technology savings and provides a net increase of $11,182,000 for 

IT improvements. 

Access to Farming Data.—The Committee understands the financial burden farmers, especially young, beginning and small farmers, face when acquiring software, licenses, and data platforms that 

provide farm-specific information that allows them to better manage their land. The Committee encourages the Department to help 

farmers and producers understand emerging technologies and data 

platforms that may work best for them as well as referring them 

to public data that can meet their needs as well. 

Farm Ownership Loans.—The Committee encourages the Farm 

Service Agency to prioritize changing the eligibility requirements 

for farm ownership loans in accordance with the provisions of Section 5101 of the 2018 Farm Bill. 

FSA Workload Study.—The Committee continues to wait for 

FSA’s workload study of FSA county offices as detailed in the 

House Report 114–205. The Committee again includes statutory 

language preventing the closure of these offices. 

Hypoxia Zones.—The Committee recognizes the importance of 

conservation practices that reduce sediment loadings, nutrient 

loadings, and harmful algal blooms. In implementing the Clean 

Lakes, Estuaries, and Rivers Initiative, the Secretary is encouraged 

to assist landowners in mitigating hypoxia zones. 

Lending Opportunities.—As the lender of the first opportunity, 

FSA is reminded to continue informing small, beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers on lending options available to them. 

National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP).—The Committee 

recognizes the value of NAIP in providing enhanced ground recognition of agricultural markers. The Committee supports the requested information technology increase that will improve the program and aid the aerial imagery of up to 20 states in 2020. 

Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) Fairness.— 

The Committee supports finding a more transparent process to calculate county transition yields (T yields) when regional or contiguous county data is available. The Committee also supports a process of review by the national FSA office when a state FSA office 

decreases the expected yield for a county by more than 50 percent 

in one year, including a review of changes that meet the 50 percent 

threshold during fiscal year 2019. 

Small Farms.—The Committee is concerned that a majority of financial and technical assistance goes to larger farmers. The Department should make every effort to reach smaller farmers and diVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
42 

rects the Secretary to report to the Committee on Appropriations 

no later than 120 days after enactment on its outreach efforts to 

small farmers, specifically those that operate on less than 25 acres, 

and how the Department meets the unique needs of smaller farmers. The report should also include resources provided to small 

farmers and what can be done to ensure resources provided by 

Congress reach these small farmers. 

STATE MEDIATION GRANTS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $3,904,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 3,067,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 5,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +1,096,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +1,933,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For State Mediation Grants, the Committee provides an appropriation of $5,000,000. 

Obligation of funds.—In recent years, the Department has not 

issued any grants in this program until the end of December. As 

a result, the mediation programs must operate for the first quarter 

of the fiscal year without any funding. The delay in funding requires some programs to take out loans secured by personal assets, 

reduce or stop pay for staff, or turn down new requests for mediation. To the extent possible, the Committee strongly encourages 

USDA to obligate available funds within 30 days of enactment. 

GRASSROOTS SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PROGRAM

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $6,500,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 6,500,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +6,500,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Grassroots Source Water Protection Program, the Committee provides an appropriation of $6,500,000. 

DAIRY INDEMNITY PROGRAM

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. 1 $500,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 1 500,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1 500,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 1 Current indefinite appropriation. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Dairy Indemnity Program, the Committee provides an 

appropriation of such sums as may be necessary (estimated to be 

$500,000 in the President’s fiscal year 2020 budget request). 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
43 

AGRICULTURAL CREDIT INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

ESTIMATED LOAN LEVELS

2019 loan level .................................................................................... $7,987,668,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 7,674,267,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 7,997,801,000 

Comparison: 

2019 loan level ............................................................................. +10,133,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +323,534,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund program account, the 

Committee provides a loan level of $7,997,801,000. 

The Committee provides a transfer of $16,081,000 to the FPAC 

Business Center account. 

The following table reflects the loan levels for the Agricultural 

Credit Insurance Fund program account: 

AGRICULTURE CREDIT PROGRAMS—LOAN LEVELS 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Farm Loan Programs: 

Farm Ownership: 

Direct .......................................................................... $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 

Unsubsidized Guaranteed .......................................... 2,750,000 2,750,000 2,750,000 

Farm Operating: 

Direct .......................................................................... 1,530,000 1,550,133 1,550,133 

Unsubsidized Guaranteed .......................................... 1,960,000 1,614,953 1,960,000 

Emergency Loans ................................................................ 37,668 29,181 37,668 

Indian Tribe Land Acquisition Loans .................................. 20,000 20,000 20,000 

Conservation Loans: 

Unsubsidized Guaranteed .......................................... 150,000 150,000 150,000 

Indian Highly Fractionated Land ........................................ 10,000 – – – 10,000 

Boll Weevil Eradication ....................................................... 30,000 60,000 20,000 

Total .................................................................. $7,987,668 $7,674,267 $7,997,801 

ESTIMATED LOAN SUBSIDY AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LEVELS 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Direct loan 

subsidy 

Guaranteed loan 

subsidy 

Administrative 

expenses 

2019 appropriation ............................................................. $59,670 $21,168 $317,068 

2020 budget estimate ........................................................ 58,440 17,280 319,762 

Provided in the Bill ............................................................. 58,440 20,972 317,068 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation .................................................... ¥1,230 ¥196 – – – 

2020 budget estimate ............................................... – – – +3,692 ¥2,694 

The following table reflects the costs of loan programs under 

credit reform: 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
44 

AGRICULTURE CREDIT PROGRAMS—SUBSIDIES AND GRANTS 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Farm Loan Subsidies 

Farm Operating: 

Direct ........................................................................................................ $59,670 $58,440 $58,440 

Unsubsidized Guaranteed ........................................................................ 21,168 17,280 20,972 

Emergency Loans .............................................................................................. 1,567 1,567 2,023 

Indian Highly Fractionated Land ...................................................................... 2,134 – – – 2,745 

Boll Weevil Eradication ..................................................................................... – – – 60 20 

Total ................................................................................................ 84,539 77,347 84,200 

ACIF Expenses: 

FSA Salaries and Expenses ..................................................................... 290,917 294,114 290,917 

Program Administrative Expenses ........................................................... 10,070 9,567 10,070 

FPAC Business Center Salaries and Expenses ........................................ 16,081 16,081 16,081 

Total, ACIF Expenses ....................................................................... $401,607 $397,109 $401,268 

RISK MANAGEMENT AGENCY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $58,361,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 56,045,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 58,361,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +2,316,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Risk Management Agency, the Committee provides an appropriation of $58,361,000. 

NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE

CONSERVATION OPERATIONS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $819,492,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 755,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 829,628,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +10,136,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +74,628,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Conservation Operations, the Committee provides an appropriation of $829,628,000. 

The Committee provides $9,400,000 for the Snow Survey and 

Water Forecasting Program; $9,481,000 for the Plant Materials 

Centers; and $74,987,000 for the Soil Surveys Program. The Committee provides $725,926,000 for Conservation Technical Assistance. The Committee provides $9,834,000 for the farmers.gov Customer Experience Portal program. 

Carbon Markets.—The Committee recognizes that carbon markets could reduce greenhouse gas emissions and provide new revenue streams for farmers. The Committee urges the Secretary to 

explore carbon markets for agriculture and develop common, 

science-based methodologies for carbon markets. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
45 

Drought Mitigation.—The Committee is concerned about severe 

and prolonged droughts in the United States. The Committee expects the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to utilize 

all available flexibility, discretion and opportunities to assist producers, irrigators and irrigation districts in implementing areawide plans to address drought resiliency and mitigation in a way 

that maintains strong rural and agriculture communities and protects natural resources. Priority should be given to supporting the 

implementation of major drought response plans, agreements or 

programs designed to result in conservation of surface water or 

groundwater. 

Harmful Algal Blooms.—The Committee strongly supports and 

directs funding to NRCS’s ongoing work to reduce nutrient loading 

from agricultural sources that can contribute to the growth of 

harmful algal blooms. Funding shall be used for targeting of watersheds where harmful algal blooms pose a threat and implementing 

a variety of conservation systems to address all transport pathways 

of phosphorus from agricultural land uses. Conservation planning 

should prioritize fields with the highest risk of elevated phosphorus 

and/or nitrogen losses. 

Monarch Butterfly Populations.—The Committee is aware that 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is considering listing the monarch butterfly under the Endangered Species Act. The potential effect of monarchs being listed as threatened or endangered would 

have significant impacts on agriculture in the U.S. The Committee 

directs the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to work together in coordination with the states, and private 

and nonprofit organizations to develop and implement strategies to 

help protect monarch butterfly populations and preserve the natural habitats critical to their survival. The Secretaries are directed 

to report back within 120 days of the passage of this Act on the 

status of this plan and any other actions the Departments are taking to encourage support of monarch conservation by the agricultural community. 

Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production.—The 

Committee provides $5,000,000 for this office. Of this amount, 

$1,000,000 is for pilot programs under section 222(d)(2) of Subtitle 

A of the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994, as 

amended by section 12302 of P.L. 115–334. 

Outcomes-Verified Soil Health Program.—The Committee understands the importance of soil health programs that promote onfarm resilience while increasing farmer profitability. The Committee urges the Secretary to establish a voluntary, outcomesverified soil health program within NRCS, allowing farmers to enroll and demonstrate that recommended soil health benchmarks 

are being met. 

Resource Conservation and Development Councils (RC&Ds).—The 

Committee recognizes RC&Ds have been valuable partners in conservation and encourages NRCS to continue working with local 

councils, as appropriate, to ensure conservation programs meet 

local resource needs. 

Sage Grouse Initiative.—The Committee supports NRCS’s sage 

grouse conservation efforts. Through the initiative, NRCS provides 

technical and financial assistance to help landowners conserve sage 

grouse habitat on their land. The initiative is an integral part of 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
46 

efforts by federal agencies, several western states, and private 

landowners to help preclude the listing of the sage grouse as an endangered species. 

State Partnerships.—NRCS appropriately partners with States, 

Territories, and Indian Tribal Organizations to implement activities within its charge and has historically provided direct resources 

to states to assist with those activities. The Committee understands that many programs offered by NRCS are popular and demand is high. To the extent possible, the Committee encourages 

NRCS to ensure the equitable allocation of resources between the 

States, Territories and Indian Tribal Organizations. The Committee directs NRCS to continue providing data on resources provided to the states in the annual budget submission to Congress. 

Three-D Elevation Program (3DEP).—The U.S. Geological Survey 

is leading the 3D Elevation Program, a collaborative initiative to 

systematically collect accurate digital elevation data nationwide. 

The Committee recognizes the positive impact of combined resources, such as NRCS’s ‘‘Light Detection and Ranging Enhanced 

Soil Survey’’ model and similar derived datasets, which can enhance conservation efforts, farmland management, and mapping of 

floodplains. The Committee encourages the Secretary, to the extent 

possible, to participate in and support 3DEP. 

WATERSHED AND FLOOD PREVENTION OPERATIONS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $150,000,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 155,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +5,000,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +155,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations, the Committee provides an appropriation of $155,000,000. 

WATERSHED REHABILITATION PROGRAM

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $10,000,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 12,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +2,000,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +12,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Watershed Rehabilitation Program, the Committee provides an appropriation of $12,000,000. 

CORPORATIONS 

FEDERAL CROP INSURANCE CORPORATION FUND

2019 appropriation ................................................................. 1$15,410,629,000 

2020 budget estimate ............................................................. 18,936,000,000 

Provided in the bill ................................................................. 18,936,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation .......................................................... ¥6,474,629,000 

2020 budget estimate ...................................................... – – – 1 Current indefinite appropriation 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
47 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund, the Committee provides an appropriation of such sums as may be necessary 

(estimated to be $8,936,000,000 in the President’s fiscal year 2020 

budget request). 

COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION FUND

REIMBURSEMENT FOR NET REALIZED LOSSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2019 appropriation ................................................................. 1$15,410,000,000 

2020 budget estimate ............................................................. 125,553,096,000 

Provided in the bill ................................................................. 125,553,096,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation .......................................................... +10,143,096,000 

2020 budget estimate ...................................................... – – – 1 Current indefinite appropriation 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Reimbursement for Net Realized Losses to the Commodity 

Credit Corporation, the Committee provides such sums as may be 

necessary to reimburse for net realized losses sustained but not 

previously reimbursed (estimated to be $25,553,096,000 in the 

President’s fiscal year 2020 budget request). 

HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT

(LIMITATION ON EXPENSES)

2019 limitation .................................................................................... ($5,000,000) 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... (5,000,000) 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. (5,000,000) 

Comparison: 

2019 limitation ............................................................................ – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Hazardous Waste Management, the Committee provides a 

limitation of $5,000,000. 

TITLE III 

RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. 1 – – – 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 1 – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. $800,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +800,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +800,000 1Funded and requested under the Office of the Secretary for the Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development, the 

Committee provides an appropriation of $800,000. The Committee 

reestablishes the Under Secretary of Rural Development and does 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
48 

not fund the Assistant to the Secretary previously funded under 

the Office of the Secretary. 

Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas (ATTRA).—The 

Committee continues to support ATTRA’s work with military veterans. The Committee directs the Secretary to submit a report not 

later than 180 days after the date of enactment on the number of 

trainings completed, number of participants and pertinent data and 

performance measures used to measure program outcomes for fiscal 

years 2017–2019. 

Climate Adaptation.—The Committee recognizes that the impacts of climate change—including sea level rise and more frequent 

and severe coastal hazards—pose a significant threat to infrastructure and economic development opportunities in rural communities. 

Therefore, the Committee encourages Rural Development to partner with USDA’s Climate Hubs to better leverage existing USDA 

programs to provide resources to communities to invest in infrastructure improvements that will enhance resilience to future impacts of climate change. 

Community Development.—The Committee is interested in the 

role that broadband connectivity can play in fostering community 

and economic development. The Committee urges USDA work collaboratively with communities to identify ways towards addressing 

complex and long-term impediments towards economic growth. 

This may include, but not be limited to, a holistic review of how 

integrating programs, streamlining grant review and increasing 

community participation may more effectively address economic development challenges. The review should also include the development of metrics that measure economic impact across functions 

such as telehealth, telecommuting, precision agriculture and the 

economic benefit to diverse populations. Within 120 days after the 

date of enactment, the Committee directs USDA to report to the 

Committee on its findings. 

Healthy Food Financing Initiative (HFFI).—HFFI, through the 

National Fund Manager, invests in projects that will increase the 

supply of and demand for healthy foods in underserved communities, through loans, grants, and by providing technical assistance. 

In order to improve access to healthy food, particularly in rural 

areas and Tribal communities, the Agriculture Improvement Act of 

2018 expands eligible projects to include healthy food enterprises. 

These food enterprises would include businesses or organizations 

along the food supply chain such as food hubs; food producers, distributors, processors, and manufacturers; commercial kitchens and 

food business incubators; mobile markets; and other direct to consumer markets. 

High-Cost Universal Service Fund (USF) Recipients with Minimum 25/3 Buildout Obligations.—ReConnect funding for service 

areas where High-Cost USF recipients under the CAF–II auction 

have buildout obligations of 25/3 Mbps or greater for fixed terrestrial broadband can only be requested by the entity that is receiving such USF support. Project sponsors that receive USF support 

in those areas may only apply for funds that serve those areas from 

the 100% loan funding category under the ReConnect Program. For 

purposes of clarification, this limitation on eligibility shall only 

apply to those areas (e.g., study areas or census blocks) for which 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
49 

the USF CAF–II recipient is subject to a buildout obligation of 25/ 

3 Mbps or greater for fixed terrestrial broadband. 

Hub Communities.—The Committee encourages the Department 

to consider the mission and scope of all program applicants, including community colleges, hospitals and other regional public service 

entities and their ability to effectively address rural depopulation 

struggles. These entities are often located in regional ‘‘hub’’ communities larger than the program population limits, yet without 

these critical services many of the surrounding smaller towns could 

not exist and prosper. The Committee encourages the Secretary to 

make grants and loans available to these institutions, located in 

rural areas as defined by current law and serve rural areas. 

Persistent Poverty Areas.—The Committee supports targeted investments in impoverished areas, particularly in persistent poverty 

counties. To understand how programs funded through the Department are serving these areas, the Committee directs the Department to submit a report to the Committees on Appropriations of 

the House and Senate on the percentage of funds allocated by each 

rural development program in fiscal years 2017, 2018 and 2019 and 

estimates for fiscal year 2020 serving individuals living in persistent poverty counties. The Department shall submit the report 

to the Committees within 180 days of enactment. 

Placemaking Approach to Rural Development and Broadband.— In order to maximize the efficacy of investment in rural communities, the Committee is interested in learning what factors determine the greatest level of success for broadband resources. The 

Committee believes that the Department should consider how communities can increase the social, cultural, and quality of life benefits of broadband beyond the historical functional benefits provided 

to schools, healthcare facilities and services, and businesses. The 

USDA should issue a request for proposals to identify a public-private partnership or partnerships with expertise and experience 

working with rural communities in ‘‘place-making’’ as a way to foster simultaneously the adoption of broadband services and the creation of greater social and cultural vitality. Selection criteria must 

include geographic and ethnic diversity as well as such factors as 

the revitalization and shaping of future town centers, community 

and county wellbeing and economic vitality, and the enhancement 

of full community participation in creating growth strategies. An 

annual report shall be provided to Congress on the accelerators of 

and impediments to success of implementation of broadband, integration of all rural development programs and drivers for making 

a place more livable. 

Qualified Opportunity Zones.—The Committee recognizes that 

Qualified Opportunity Zones were created to incentivize greater 

private-sector investments in rural and economically distressed 

communities. Given the critical role that USDA Rural Development 

programs play in supporting economic development opportunities 

in these communities, the Committee encourages the Under Secretary for Rural Development to develop strategies to leverage existing RD resources to support greater investment in communities 

located in or adjacent to a Qualified Opportunity Zone. 

ReConnect Program.—The Committee directs the Rural Utilities 

Service (RUS), following the first round of applications to the Rural 

e-Connectivity Pilot Program, to convene interested stakeholders 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
50 

including, but not limited to, telecommunication companies, rural 

electric cooperatives and utilities, internet service providers and 

municipalities to gather comments and recommendations for improving program implementation. The Committee recognizes that 

this is the first round of funding and commends the RUS for efforts 

to date in establishing and administering the program. The Committee also recognizes possible unintended consequences and unanticipated obstacles may have arisen from the program design to 

program implementation stages. Specifically, the Committee is concerned about the lack of access to ReConnect funds for entities 

other than the CAF–II auction recipient in a census block. Currently there is no connectivity requirement, such as number of 

households served, for these funds, and therefore many rural 

Americans are still left without broadband access. The Committee 

believes that all Americans should have access to reliable and affordable broadband, and urges the USDA to amend the ReConnect 

eligibility requirements in order to better provide service to an accurate number of households, grant recipients, and census block 

areas. Given the speed, anticipated demand and importance of expanding broadband infrastructure in rural areas, it is imperative 

to have all interested stakeholders engaged to make best use of 

taxpayer resources. 

Rural Energy Savings Program (RESP).—The Committee supports RESP and the opportunity it provides to launch or expand 

energy efficiency financing programs. The Committee urges the Department to conduct outreach to co-ops to build awareness of the 

program. 

Veterinary Care Facilities.—Due to recent decline of and urgent 

need for veterinarians to serve in rural and underserved areas, the 

Committee expects USDA to give high priority to animal and veterinary care facilities for receipt of loans and grants through Rural 

Development programs including Community Facilities Loan and 

Grant Programs and the Rural Business Service programs. 

RURAL DEVELOPMENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Appropriations ........................................................................... $236,835,000 $192,343,000 $255,835,000

Transfers from: 

Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account ........... 412,254,000 244,249,000 412,254,000 

Rural Community Facilities Program Account ................. – – – 147,591,000 – – – 

Rural Development Loan Fund Program Account ............ 4,468,000 – – – 4,468,000 

Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loan Program Account .............................................................. 33,270,000 38,027,000 33,270,000 

Rural Business Programs ................................................ – – – 7,035,000 – – – 

Rural Water and Waste Program ..................................... – – – 18,149,000 – – – 

Total, RD Salaries and Expenses ........................... $686,827,000 $647,394,000 $705,827,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Salaries and Expenses of the Rural Development mission area, the Committee provides an appropriation of $255,835,000. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
51 

Rural Development Staffing.—The Committee is concerned by the 

pace of operations at the Rural Development (RD) state offices due 

to reported staffing shortages. With authority over sizable financial 

resources, these programs are uniquely poised to provide essential 

services to and increase the economic competitiveness of underserved rural areas. However, the Committee is aware that a lack 

of staff at program offices has created a cyclical backlog of applications. Such delays and uncertainty deter potential applicants and 

fundamentally undercut the programs potential impact. The Committee includes an additional $25,000,0000 for salaries and expenses to support 4,566 total staff years and directs the Department to increase hiring at State offices to fulfill Rural Development’s commitment towards improving customer service. 

Rural Hospitals.—Many rural hospitals have closed in recent 

years, with many more vulnerable. Rural hospitals are an essential 

pillar of their communities and are necessary to create the economic growth that is direly needed in rural communities. USDA 

has the experience and expertise to help struggling rural hospitals 

negotiate, reorganize, and revitalize. Providing assistance to 

strengthen their sustainability will protect taxpayer investments 

and help preserve the future of rural health care. Building on the 

2018 Farm Bill Joint Explanatory Statement, the Committee provides $1,000,000 to expand technical assistance to vulnerable hospitals in the Community Facilities portfolio to protect the government funds already expended and preserve access to health care in 

rural communities. In addition, where appropriate, the Committee 

directs the Department to provide technical assistance to those hospitals that seek to refinance their debt under the new provision for 

refinancing certain hospital debt as authorized by Section 6103 of 

the 2018 Farm Bill, in order to protect the investment of government funds expended for this purpose. 

Single Family Direct Home Loans.—The Committee continues to 

provide the resources to meet demand to assist low and very low 

income applicants obtain decent, safe and sanitary housing in rural 

areas. 

RURAL HOUSING SERVICE

RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Loan level Subsidy level Administrative 

expenses 

2019 Appropriation ................................................................... $25,345,500 $88,063 $412,254 

2020 Budget Estimate .............................................................. 24,260,000 – – – 244,249 

Provided in the Bill ................................................................... 25,373,000 141,727 412,254 

Comparison: 

2019 Appropriation .......................................................... +27,500 +53,664 – – – 

2020 Budget Estimate ..................................................... +$1,113,000 +$141,727 +$168,005 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Housing Insurance Fund program account, the 

Committee provides a loan level of $25,373,000,000. 

The following table reflects the loan levels for the Rural Housing 

Insurance Fund program account: 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
52 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Rural Housing Insurance Fund Loans 

Single Family Housing (sec. 502): 

Direct ............................................................................. $1,000,000 – – – $1,000,000 

Unsubsidized Guaranteed ............................................. 24,000,000 $24,000,000 24,000,000 

Housing Repair (sec. 504) ..................................................... 28,000 – – – 28,000 

Rental Housing (sec. 515) ..................................................... 40,000 – – – 45,000 

Multi-family Guaranteed (sec. 538) ...................................... 230,000 250,000 250,000 

Site Development Loans ........................................................ 5,000 – – – 5,000 

Credit Sales of Acquired Property ......................................... 10,000 10,000 10,000 

Self-help Housing Land Development Fund .......................... 5,000 – – – 5,000 

Farm Labor Housing .............................................................. 27,500 – – – 30,000 

Total, Loan Authorization .............................................. $25,345,500 $24,260,000 $25,373,000 

The following table reflects the costs of loan programs under 

credit reform: 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account (Loan Subsidies 

and Grants): 

Single Family Housing (sec. 502): 

Direct ............................................................................. $67,700 – – – $112,900 

Housing Repair (sec. 504) ............................................ 3,419 – – – 4,679 

Rental Housing (sec. 515) ..................................................... 9,484 – – – 13,662 

Farm Labor Housing .............................................................. 6,853 – – – 9,363 

Site Development (sec. 524) ................................................. 176 – – – 546 

Self-Help Land (sec. 523) ..................................................... 431 – – – 577 

Total, Loan Subsidies ................................................... 88,063 – – – 141,727 

Farm Labor Housing Grants .................................................. 10,000 – – – 10,000 

RHIF Expenses: 

Administrative Expenses ............................................... $412,254 $244,249 $412,254 

RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $1,331,400,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 1,407,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1,375,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +43,600,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥32,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rental Assistance Program, the Committee provides a 

program level of $1,375,000,000. This provides full funding for the 

program and does not include rural vouchers as proposed in the 

budget request. 

MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVITALIZATION PROGRAM ACCOUNT

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $51,500,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 75,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +23,500,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +75,000,000 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
53 

For the Multifamily Housing Revitalization Program Account, the Committee provides an appropriation of $75,000,000, including 

$35,000,000 for the rural housing voucher program. 

The Committee does not accept the proposal to move the voucher 

and multifamily housing revitalization programs. 

MUTUAL AND SELF-HELP HOUSING GRANTS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $30,000,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 32,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +2,000,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +32,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Mutual and Self-Help Housing program, the Committee provides an appropriation of $32,000,000. 

RURAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANTS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $45,000,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 45,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +45,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Housing Assistance Grants program, the Committee provides an appropriation of $45,000,000, including 

$15,000,000 for rural housing preservation grants. 

The Committee encourages USDA to consider utilizing resources 

to address families or individuals that have straight-pipe septic 

systems or an individual sewage treatment system that fail to meet 

state or federal requirements. 

RURAL COMMUNITY FACILITIES PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $50,063,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 60,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 71,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +20,937,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +11,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Community Facilities Program Account, the Committee provides an appropriation of $71,000,000. 

The Committee continues to take the Rural Development administrative expense transfer from the Rural Housing Insurance Fund 

(RHIF) and does not accept the proposed transfer from the Rural 

Community Facilities program account. 

Community Facility Loans.—The Committee directs the Department to report on the Community Facilities Direct Loan and Grant 

and Community Facilities Guaranteed Loan programs portfolio 

within 180 days of enactment of the bill. The report shall include: 

the credit quality of selected significant loans reported by facility 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
54 

type, including educational, and health care; a list and description 

of measures USDA tracks to evaluate the effect on communities of 

projects funded through Community Facilities programs and for 

how long these measures are tracked; the number of Community 

Facilities projects under which funding is being used for refinancing and/or acquisition in order to improve or prevent loss of 

service to communities. 

The following table provides the Committee’s recommendations 

as compared to the budget request: 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Loan Levels: 

Community Facility Direct Loans ..................................... ($2,800,000) ($2,500,000) ($2,800,000) 

Community Facility Guaranteed Loans ............................ (148,287) (500,000) (250,000) 

Subsidy and Grants: 

Community Facility Guaranteed Loans ............................ 4,285 – – – – – – 

Community Facility Grants .............................................. 30,000 50,000 50,000 

Rural Community Development Initiative ........................ 6,000 – – – 8,000 

Economic Impact Initiative .............................................. 5,778 – – – 6,000 

Tribal College Grants ....................................................... 4,000 10,000 7,000 

Total, Rural Community Facilities Program Subsidy and Grants .................................................. $50,063 $60,000 $71,000 

RURAL BUSINESS-COOPERATIVE SERVICE

RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $65,040,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 20,500,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 67,600,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +2,560,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +47,100,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Business Program Account, the Committee provides an appropriation of $67,600,000. 

The Committee provides resources to operate programs under the 

Rural Business-Cooperative Service (RBS). RBS programs complement lending activities of the private sector by promoting economic prosperity in rural communities through improved access to 

capital and economic development on a regional scale. 

Arts in rural communities.—The Committee recognizes the valuable role of the arts in the economic and community development 

of rural communities across the country. In providing grants and 

assistance under this title, Rural Development shall continue to 

support individuals, nonprofits and small businesses in the arts 

through these traditional economic development tools, including 

business incubators, and economic development planning and technical assistance. 

The following table provides the Committee’s recommendations 

as compared to the budget request: 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
55 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Loan Level: 

Business and Industry Guaranteed Loans ...................... ($950,000) (1,000,000) (1,200,000) 

Subsidy and Grants: 

Business and Industry Guaranteed Loans ...................... 22,040 20,500 24,600 

Rural Business Development Grants ............................... 35,000 – – – 35,000 

Delta Regional Authority/Appalachian Regional 

Commission/ Northern Border Regional Commission 8,000 – – – 8,000 

Total, Rural Business Program Subsidy and 

Grants ................................................................. $65,040 $20,500 $67,600 

The following programs are included in the bill for the Rural 

Business Program account: $500,000 for rural transportation technical assistance and $4,000,000 for Federally Recognized Native 

American Tribes, of which $250,000 is for transportation technical 

assistance. 

INTERMEDIARY RELENDING PROGRAM FUND ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Loan 

level 

Subsidy 

level 

Administrative 

expenses 

2019 Appropriation ................................................................... $18,889 $4,157 $4,468 

2020 Budget Estimate .............................................................. – – – – – – – – – 

Provided in the Bill ................................................................... 18,889 5,219 4,468 

Comparison: 

2019 Appropriation .......................................................... – – – +1,062 – – – 

2020 Budget Estimate ..................................................... +18,889 +5,219 +4,468 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Intermediary Relending Program Fund Account, the 

Committee provides for a loan level of $18,889,000. 

For the loan subsidy, the Committee provides an appropriation 

of $5,219,000. In addition, the Committee provides $4,468,000 for 

administrative expenses. 

RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $50,000,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 50,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +50,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Economic Development Loans Program Account, 

the Committee provides for a loan level of $50,000,000. 

RURAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $29,100,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 29,800,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +700,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +29,800,000 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
56 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Rural Cooperative Development Grants, the Committee provides an appropriation of $29,800,000. This total includes 

$3,000,000 for a cooperative agreement for the Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas program and $18,000,000 for the 

Value-added Agricultural Product Market Development Grant Program under the Local Agriculture Market Program in the 2018 

Farm Bill. 

Cooperatives.—The Committee recognizes the important role that 

cooperatives play in the nation’s rural economy and the continued 

need to fund established and successful development centers 

throughout the country. 

RURAL MICRO-ENTREPRENEUR ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $3,000,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 6,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +3,000,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +6,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program (RMAP), 

the Committee provides an appropriation of $6,000,000. RMAP provides loans and grants to non-profit organizations, communitybased financial institutions, and local economic development councils, which in turn provide technical assistance services and 

microloans to rural owner-operated small businesses and aspiring 

entrepreneurs. These funds support the economic development 

needs of rural communities and make up for the end of mandatory 

Farm Bill funding. 

RURAL ENERGY FOR AMERICA PROGRAM

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $335,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 353,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +18,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +353,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Energy for America Program, the Committee provides a loan level of $10,000,000 and an appropriation of $353,000 

for the loan subsidy to make loans as authorized by section 9007 

of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 

8107). 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
57 

RURAL UTILITIES SERVICE

RURAL WATER AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $548,690,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 527,630,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 718,480,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +169,790,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +190,850,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account, the Committee provides an appropriation of $718,480,000. Rural areas 

continue to face immense needs and challenges in attaining safe 

and clean water, and this program provides targeted and coordinated support for these communities and is essential for the delivery of safe, dependable and affordable water and wastewater to 

rural America. The Committee believes this program is complementary, not duplicative, of other federal programs and critical in supporting quality of life, economic development and health to rural 

communities. 

Domestic Preference.—The bill includes language specifying that 

RUS’ Rural Water and Waste Disposal program account projects 

utilizing iron and steel shall use iron and steel products produced 

in the United States. RUS shall apply the Environmental Protection Agency’s definition of public water systems while implementing the domestic preference provision. 

Open Access Infrastructure.—The Committee is aware that public 

entities have invested in open access fiber infrastructure that is facilitating the delivery of high-speed broadband services by licensed 

telecommunications providers, including the model pioneered by 

public port authorities. The Committee understands that while particular open access fiber projects may be eligible for RUS grants 

and loans, more generally, there exist significant barriers to government backing for these types of open access investments. The 

Committee believes RUS programs should support financially-feasible open access infrastructure projects that meet program goals. 

The Committee urges RUS to ensure the agency’s criteria and application processes provide for fair consideration of open access 

projects by accounting for the unique structures and opportunities 

such projects present in advancing broadband deployment in 

unserved and underserved communities. 

Sewage Management.—The Committee supports the development 

of a multi-faceted solution to the problem of raw sewage discharge 

in rural communities. 

Technical Assistance and Training Grant Program.—The Committee provides $30,000,000 for water and waste technical assistance and training grants. Up to $5,000,000 of these resources shall 

be used to support the national apprenticeship/workforce development program to ensure a future pipeline of workers to provide 

clean and safe water for the public. 

Water Supplies for Very Small Communities.—The Committee is 

aware of concerns that RUS grant programs do not adequately help 

small, disadvantaged, and severely disadvantaged communities acVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
58 

cess the funding and expertise necessary to develop sustainable 

water supplies or otherwise improve their wastewater systems, and 

it directs the agency to focus its efforts to assist these communities 

with predevelopment planning to help them address their water 

supply needs. 

The following table provides the Committee’s recommendations 

as compared to the budget request: 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Loan Levels: 

Water and Waste Direct Loans .................................. ($1,400,000) ($1,200,000) ($1,400,000) 

Water and Waste Guaranteed Loans ......................... (50,000) – – – (50,000) 

Subsidy and Grants: 

Direct Subsidy ............................................................ – – – 54,720 63,840 

Guaranteed Subsidy ................................................... 190 – – – 70 

Water and Waste Revolving Fund ............................. 1,000 1,000 1,000 

Water Well System Grants ......................................... 1,500 993 15,000 

Grants for the Colonias and AK/HI ............................ 68,000 68,000 70,000 

Water and Waste Technical Assistance Grants ........ 30,000 40,000 30,000 

Circuit Rider Program ................................................ 19,000 19,000 19,570 

Solid Waste Management Grants .............................. 4,000 4,000 4,000 

High Energy Cost Grants ........................................... 10,000 – – – – – – 

Water and Waste Disposal Grants ............................ 400,000 324,917 500,000 

306A(i)(2) Grants ....................................................... 15,000 15,000 15,000 

Total, Subsidies and Grants ............................. $548,690 $527,630 $718,480 

RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS

LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Loan Level Subsidy 

level 

Administrative 

expenses 

2019 Appropriation ............................................................. $6,940,000 $1,725 $33,270 

2020 Budget Estimate ........................................................ 6,190,000 1,933 38,027 

Provided in the Bill ............................................................. 6,940,000 3,795 33,270 

Comparison: 

2019 Appropriation .................................................... – – – +2,070 – – – 

2020 Budget Estimate ............................................... +750,000 +1,862 ¥4,757 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program Account, the Committee provides a loan level of 

$6,940,000,000. In addition, the Committee provides $33,270,000 

for administrative expenses. 

The following table reflects the loan levels for the Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program Account: 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Loan Authorizations: 

Electric: 

Direct, FFB ............................................................................................... $5,500,000 $5,500,000 $5,500,000 

Guaranteed Underwriting ......................................................................... 750,000 – – – 750,000 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
59 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Subtotal ........................................................................................... 6,250,000 5,500,000 6,250,000 

Telecommunications: 

Direct, Treasury Rate ............................................................................... 345,000 175,727 345,000 

Direct, FFB ............................................................................................... 345,000 514,273 345,000 

Total, Loan Authorizations .............................................................. $6,940,000 $6,190,000 $6,940,000 

BROADBAND PROGRAM

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2019 

enacted 

FY 2020 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Broadband Program: 

Loan Authorization ................................................................................... $29,851 – – – $29,851 

Loan Subsidy ............................................................................................ 5,830 – – – 5,830 

Grants ...................................................................................................... 30,000 30,000 50,000 

Distance Learning and Telemedicine: 

Grants ...................................................................................................... 34,000 43,600 50,000 

Total, Loan Subsidy and Grants ..................................................... $69,830 $73,600 $105,830 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Broadband Program, the Committee provides an appropriation of $5,830,000 for a loan authorization level of $29,851,000. 

Healthcare and Education Options.—The Committee continues to 

support Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband program 

grants that assist rural communities in connecting to the rest of 

the world and overcoming health disparities that effect that population, including addressing the opioid abuse epidemic in rural 

communities. The Committee urges the Under Secretary for Rural 

Development to continue awarding grants that support technology 

upgrades that provide additional healthcare access and education 

through the use of telemedicine and expanded services in community health centers through partnerships with hub medical centers. 

Indian Country Broadband.—The Committee recognizes the persistent digital divide in America and the acute impacts this has on 

educational, health, public safety, and economic opportunities in 

Indian country. The Committee urges the Department to explore 

means to expand high-speed internet deployment in Indian country 

utilizing current programs. Specifically, the Committee encourages 

the USDA to work with tribal communities to better understand 

the unique infrastructure challenges they face to ensure that they 

are not held at a competitive disadvantage when competing for 

these resources. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
60 

TITLE IV 

DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR FOOD, NUTRITION, AND

CONSUMER SERVICES

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $800,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 800,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 800,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and 

Consumer Services, the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$800,000. 

Cross-government Coordination on Nutrition. The committee calls 

on USDA to lead a whole of government approach and create a report on responsibilities of each agency and how they will coordinate 

the biochemical, physiologic, nutritional and population health effects of government recommendation for nutrition and food consumption in America. 

Innovative Technologies.—The Committee looks forward to the 

results of the SNAP online purchasing pilot. The Committee recognizes the need for enhanced efficiency in nutrition programs and 

supports FNS as it continues to implement and evaluate new technologies. 

Nutrition Education Coordination.—USDA plays an important 

role in offering nutrition education and training through programs 

such as SNAP–Ed, EFNEP and WIC. However, the Committee is 

concerned regarding the lack of communication and coordination 

between the five main nutrition education programs (SNAP–Ed, 

EFNEP, Team Nutrition, WIC and FINI/Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program) at USDA. USDA is directed to report to 

the Committees within 90 days of the enactment of this Act on the 

steps it will take to better coordinate nutrition education, utilize 

experts from CNPP in the Dietary Guidelines development, and 

track program effectiveness across each program. 

Public Release of Information.—The Committee directs FNS to 

continue making all policy documents related to the WIC program 

(including, but not limited to, instructions, memoranda, guidance, 

and questions and answers) available to the public on the Internet 

within one week of their release to WIC state administrators. 

Seniors Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program (SFMNP).—The 

Committee recognizes the success of the SFMNP, with over 800,000 

low-income seniors able to benefit from 19,449 farmers at 3,641 

farmers’ markets as well as 2,541 roadside stands and 94 community supported agriculture programs in FY 2017. The Committee 

encourages USDA to improve eligible participants’ awareness of the 

SFMNP through education and outreach efforts. The Committee is 

critically aware of the need for SFMNP in low income communities. 

The Committee directs FNS to research the backlog of states requesting SFMNP funding and to deliver their findings to the Committees within 180 days of enactment. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
61 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).—The Committee is aware of the challenges people face when transitioning 

out of incarceration, including finding employment. Access to nutrition assistance is critical to successfully reentering society as it offers temporary assistance to ex-offenders as they search for stable 

employment. The Committee directs the Department to research 

and report ways states especially those who have lifted or modified 

the SNAP drug felony ban—can best serve this population, such as 

but not limited to: pre-release applications for SNAP and employment and training programs for this population. The Committee directs the Department to share those findings in a report with the 

Appropriations Committees and disseminate those best practices to 

state agencies no later than 180 days after enactment of this act. 

Such findings should also be made available online for the public 

to utilize. 

WIC Realignment.—The Committee is concerned with the proposed realignment of state WIC agencies within FNS regional offices, which could have unintended consequences on resource distribution and multi-state projects. The Committee urges FNS to 

reach out to stakeholders and requests a briefing within 60 days 

of enactment on how the realignment is proceeding and how state 

and Indian Tribal Organizations’ concerns are being addressed. 

FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE

CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $23,140,781,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 23,943,216,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 24,040,885,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +900,104,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +97,669,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Child Nutrition Programs, the Committee provides 

$24,040,885,000 which includes $35,000,000 for school meals equipment grants, $50,000,000 for the Summer Electronic Benefits 

Transfer (EBT) for Children Demonstration, and $1,000,000 for 

technical assistance related to sodium. 

Cost of School Meals.—The Committee is interested in understanding the cost of school meals in Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands. The Committee directs FNS to include all territories, including those that receive block grants, in any studies it 

does on the Child Nutrition Programs. 

Food Waste.—Food waste also remains a concern in the school 

meals program. Schools should have the ability to serve leftover, 

compliant foods in a quick, timely manner in accordance with food 

safety requirements. The Committee urges USDA to consider implementing flexibilities in allowing schools to utilize these foods in 

a more efficient manner. 

Length of School Meals.—The Committee is aware that providing 

adequate time to eat healthy school meals increases the consumption of fruits and vegetables and minimizes food waste. The ComVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
62 

mittee encourages the Department, in collaboration with the U.S. 

Department of Education, to develop best practices to ensure school 

schedules provide students adequate time to eat healthy school 

meals. 

School Breakfast Expansion Grants.—The Committee is concerned that while participation in the School Breakfast Program is 

increasing, many children who are eligible for the School Breakfast 

Program are not participating. Therefore, the Committee provides 

$10,000,000 for grants for expansion of the School Breakfast Program, of which $1,000,000 is dedicated to the U.S. territories. 

School Nutrition Standards.—The Committee directs the Department to publish on its website data on the compliance of school 

food authorities with respect to the nutritional requirements under 

section 9(f) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act. 

The data reported should include the total number of school food 

authorities in each state, the number of school food authorities in 

compliance with the requirements, and the percentage of school 

food authorities in compliance with the requirements by state. 

Sodium Reduction.— The Committee recognizes the need for additional support for schools to meet the sodium-reduction targets 

and, of the funds made available for Team Nutrition, provides 

$1,000,000 for technical assistance. Within one year of enactment, 

the Committees requests a report on the use of the funds to provide 

schools with technical assistance, training resources, and mentoring to meet the sodium-reduction targets. Further, the Committee requests information on USDA’s plans to update the sodium-reduction targets consistent with the 2020 Dietary Guidelines 

for Americans recommendations on sodium. The Committee strongly encourages USDA to work with industry and other stakeholders 

to ensure there that there are a wide variety of lower-sodium options on the market from which schools can procure. 

Summer EBT.—The Committee recognizes the benefits the Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) program has had on reducing childhood hunger. The Committee provides increased funding to 

serve more children and directs the Department to expand the 

Summer EBT program into new areas while also continuing to 

serve areas that have received such funding in prior years. Additionally, the Committee is aware that the Summer EBT evaluation 

suggests greater barriers for participation, redemption and exhaustion of benefits and higher administrative costs in the Summer 

EBT WIC model than in the Summer EBT SNAP model. Therefore, 

the Committee encourages the Secretary to prioritize Summer EBT 

projects through the SNAP model. 

Training for School Food Service Personnel.—The Committee recognizes the value of webinars, conference calls, and online courses 

in expanding the reach of trainings for school food service personnel. For any in-person trainings for school food service personnel, all efforts should be made to ensure those trainings are 

held during normal working hours. In the event such training is 

scheduled outside working hours, all efforts should be made to inform food service personnel of the necessity of the training; the 

committee also encourages the Department to work with states on 

compensation for personnel participating in such training programs 

under such circumstances. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
63 

Yogurt.—The Committee is aware that after soliciting Requests 

for Information on the food crediting system for the school lunch 

and breakfast programs, FNS decided to maintain the current crediting standard for strained, high-protein yogurt. The Committee encourages the Secretary to continue evaluating how strained, highprotein yogurt is credited based on the best available science. The 

Committee also requests a briefing from the Department, within 

180 days of enactment, to better understand food crediting in the 

Child Nutrition programs, particularly how decisions are made regarding products containing high protein. 

The following table reflects the Committee recommendations for 

the child nutrition programs: 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Child Nutrition Programs: 

School Lunch Program .......................................................................................................................... $12,726,216 

School Breakfast Program ..................................................................................................................... 4,929,291 

Child and Adult Care Food Program ..................................................................................................... 3,839,675 

Summer Food Service Program ............................................................................................................. 551,928 

Special Milk Program ............................................................................................................................ 7,185 

State Administrative Expenses .............................................................................................................. 315,130 

Commodity Procurement ........................................................................................................................ 1,472,629 

Food Safety Education ........................................................................................................................... 2,929 

Coordinated Review ............................................................................................................................... 10,000 

Computer Support and Processing ....................................................................................................... 12,124 

Training and Technical Assistance ....................................................................................................... 33,935 

CNP Studies and Evaluations ............................................................................................................... 21,639 

CN Payment Accuracy ........................................................................................................................... 11,203 

Farm to School Team ............................................................................................................................ 3,997 

Team Nutrition ....................................................................................................................................... 16,504 

Healthier U.S. Schools Challenge .......................................................................................................... 1,500 

School Meals Equipment Grants ........................................................................................................... 35,000 

Summer EBT Demonstration ................................................................................................................. 50,000 

Total .............................................................................................................................................. $24,040,885 

SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN (WIC)

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $6,075,000,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 5,750,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 6,000,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥75,000,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +250,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$6,000,000,000. The Committee provides $70,000,000 for the 

breastfeeding peer counselor program and $14,000,000 for infrastructure. The Committee encourages FNS to support innovative 

technologies that can improve rural and urban participants’ access 

to lactation consultants particularly outside of normal WIC clinic 

business hours. 

USDA data shows that WIC participation rates have decreased 

steadily since fiscal year 2010. The President’s budget request includes a projection of an average monthly participation rate of 6.6 

million women, infants, and children for fiscal year 2020. 

USDA is estimating recovery and carryover funds to be higher 

than average. Furthermore, the Secretary has a WIC contingency 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
64 

reserve fund as a safety net to meet unexpected demand. With 

lower participation rates, higher carryover funds, and an ample reserve fund, the Committee provides funding that will ensure all eligible participants will be served. 

The Committee will continue to monitor WIC participation, carryover funds, and food costs and take additional action as necessary to ensure that funding provided in fiscal year 2020 remains 

sufficient to serve all eligible applicants. 

Breastfeeding Rates.—The Committee is interested in understanding how to improve breastfeeding rates, especially as higher 

rates have been linked to lower childhood obesity. The Committee 

also recognizes that there are many barriers to breastfeeding as detailed in CDC’s 2018 Breastfeeding Report Card. Each year, FNS 

awards some state agencies bonus awards for their successful efforts in promoting and supporting breastfeeding among WIC participants. The Committee directs FNS to review the work of awardees from previous years to look for commonalities and trends. FNS 

should develop a report, within 180 days of enactment, that summarizes these best practices. This report should include a summary 

of the factors that prevent or impede breastfeeding and recommendations on how they can be addressed. 

Zika Outreach and Education.—The Committee encourages the 

Department to continue its education and outreach efforts through 

the WIC program to provide pregnant women with the information 

they need to prevent Zika. 

SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $73,476,921,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 69,069,910,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 71,093,908,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥2,383,013,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +2,023,998,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the Com- mittee provides $71,093,908,000. The total amount includes 

$5,000,000,000 for a contingency reserve to be used only in the 

amount necessary. 

College Hunger.—The Committee is concerned that SNAP-eligible 

students who are food-insecure lack proper clarity and information 

about resources available to them. Therefore, the Committee directs the Food and Nutrition Service to make information available 

on its website regarding student SNAP eligibility requirements 

easier to understand and more accessible. The Committee further 

directs FNS regional offices to collect and review information about 

existing SNAP flexibilities and examples of approaches state SNAP 

agencies are taking to assist eligible college students to access 

SNAP benefits and share such information with state SNAP agencies. It also encourages the Secretary to work with the Department 

of Education to share these best practices with higher education institutions. The Committee directs FNS to provide a briefing to the 

Committee on Appropriations on its plan for executing these items 

no later than 90 days after enactment. 

Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) Demonstration Project for Tribal Organizations.—The Committee supVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
65 

ports FDPIR and the ability of tribal organizations to enter into 

638 self-determination contracts for the procurement of FDPIR 

foods, which would promote tribal sovereignty and allow tailoring 

of this vital program to meet specific tribal cultural and local 

needs. The Committee provides $3,000,000 for the 638 Tribal Self 

Governance Demonstration Program for Tribal Organizations as 

described in Section 4003 of P.L. 115–334. Additionally, the Committee encourages the Secretary to review Department-wide nutrition programs, with the full participation of Indian tribes and tribal organizations, to consider ways in which more Native foods can 

be incorporated into these programs where possible and the possibility of allowing tribes to provide input into federal nutritional 

guidance that reflects unique Indian tribal needs. 

Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP) Study.—The Committee 

supports ongoing efforts by the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico to 

shift NAP to SNAP. The Committee recognizes this will require 

Puerto Rico to build additional capacity to operate SNAP according 

to federal rules. The Committee provides $5 million (of which no 

less than $1 million shall be made available to Puerto Rico to support the process) to develop a report to Congress that updates the 

administrative, operational, and program integrity parts of chapter 

IV of the 2010 report ‘‘Implementing Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program in Puerto Rico: A Feasibility Study’’ and includes 

a detailed plan with specific steps and timelines for USDA and the 

Commonwealth to address and remedy identified gaps. The Secretary is to report the results to the Committees no later than September 30, 2020. In addition, the Committee provides $2 million for 

the Commonwealth to fund a preliminary planning process regarding technology requirements and costs to operate SNAP and requests the Commonwealth to provide a report to the Committees 

on its efforts no later than September 30, 2020. 

Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP) Transparency.—The Committee recognizes the importance of transparency and data availability for Puerto Rico’s Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP). The 

Committee directs the Secretary to publish information regarding 

monthly enrollment, issuance data and the Commonwealth’s State 

Plan of Operations for NAP on the Department’s web site. The 

Committee further directs the Secretary, acting through the Center 

for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, to measure the cost of the 

Thrifty Food Plan in Puerto Rico. The Department is directed to report to the Committee no later than 90 days after enactment of this 

Act on the status of the Department’s efforts to achieve greater 

transparency to Puerto Rico’s Nutrition Assistance Program. 

The following table reflects the Committee recommendations for 

SNAP: 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Account: 

Benefits ................................................................................................................................................. $57,496,374 

Contingency Reserve ............................................................................................................................. 5,000,000 

Administrative Costs: 

State Administrative Costs ................................................................................................................... 4,965,651 

Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention Grant Program ................................................................ 441,000

Employment and Training ..................................................................................................................... 513,694 

Mandatory Other Program Costs ........................................................................................................... 213,289 

Discretionary Other Program Costs ....................................................................................................... 998 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
66 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Administrative Subtotal ................................................................................................................ 6,134,632 

Nutrition Assistance for Puerto Rico (NAP) .......................................................................................... 1,959,136 

American Samoa ................................................................................................................................... 7,868 

Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations .............................................................................. 153,000 

TEFAP Commodities ............................................................................................................................... 320,750 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands ................................................................................. 12,148 

Community Food Project ........................................................................................................................ 5,000 

Program Access ..................................................................................................................................... 5,000 

Subtotal ........................................................................................................................................ 2,442,954 

Total ..................................................................................................................................... $71,093,908 

COMMODITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $322,139,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 55,471,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 344,248,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +22,109,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +288,777,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

The Committee provides an appropriation of $344,248,000 for the 

Commodity Assistance Program. The recommended funding level 

for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program is $245,000,000. 

The Committee recognizes the importance of the CSFP, which improves the health of low-income elderly persons at least 60 years 

of age by supplementing their diets with nutritious foods. The 

amount provided fully funds expected caseload. 

The Committee recommendation maintains the 2019 levels of 

$18,548,000 for the Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program, 

$79,630,000 for administrative funding for The Emergency Food 

Assistance Program (TEFAP) and $1,070,000 for the Food Donations Programs for Pacific Island Assistance. 

TEFAP Handling and Distribution Costs.—In addition to grant 

funds supporting commodity handling and distribution costs, the 

bill permits states to use up to 15 percent of the funds provided 

for purchasing TEFAP commodities to help with the costs of storing, transporting, and distributing commodities. The Committee expects state agencies to consult with their emergency feeding organizations on the need for the conversion of such funds. 

NUTRITION PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $164,688,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 152,041,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 154,041,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥10,647,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +2,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Nutrition Programs Administration, the Committee provides 

$154,041,000, including $2,000,000 to continue the Congressional 

Hunger Center Fellows Program. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
67 

TITLE V 

FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR TRADE AND FOREIGN

AGRICULTURAL AFFAIRS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $875,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 875,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 875,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs, the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$875,000. 

The Committee supports expanding the utilization of various modalities, including vouchers, monetary transfers, and locally and regionally procured assistance, in addition to in-kind contributions 

from the United States, in order to address hunger and assist those 

in emergency situations around the globe with the most appropriate, efficient, and timely means available. 

OFFICE OF CODEX ALIMENTARIUS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $3,976,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 4,775,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 4,775,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +799,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of Codex Alimentarius, the Committee provides an 

appropriation of $4,775,000. 

FOREIGN AGRICULTURAL SERVICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriation Transfer from export loan account Total 

2019 appropriation ................................................................... $213,890,000 $6,382,000 $220,272,000 

2020 budget estimate .............................................................. 192,824,000 6,063,000 198,887,000 

Provided in the bill ................................................................... 215,513,000 6,382,000 221,895,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation .......................................................... +1,623,000 – – – +1,623,000 

2020 budget estimate ..................................................... +22,689,000 +319,000 +23,008,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Foreign Agricultural Service, the Committee provides an 

appropriation of $215,513,000 and a transfer of $6,382,000, for a 

total appropriation of $221,895,000. 

The Committee provides increases in funding for International 

Cooperative Administrative Support Services, Capital Security Cost 

Sharing, locally employed staff, and biotech programs. The ComVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
68 

mittee does not maintain the 2019 increase for the Country Strategy Support Fund. 

Farmer-to-Farmer.—The Committee is interested in improving 

the efficacy of dollars that serve to improve local food production 

around the world through the Global Food Security Act and the 

Feed the Future Initiative. International food security is beneficial 

for reducing poverty and risk of conflict and can also serve to increase the buying power of American goods and services. The John 

Ogonowski and Doug Bereuter Farmer-to-Farmer program (Farmer-to-Farmer) is a program that brings American ingenuity to our 

investment in local food production. The Committee is interested in 

a stronger coordination between USAID and USDA for Farmer-toFarmer. The Committee is interested in USAID ensuring that recommendations from USDA are considered in identifying the Country Coordinators for Feed the Future priority countries. Coordinators should develop a clear strategy for determining what expertise 

is needed to accelerate success and overcome obstacles that impede 

more effective local food production. This should also include a pull 

strategy for Farmer-to-Farmer volunteers, which is defined as requiring the country/program to locally define what expertise is 

needed based on insights from the field rather than from the central office. The efforts of the partnership with USAID should be 

strengthened by a stronger relationship with USDA, by incorporating working groups in Washington. In addition, USAID 

should seek the expertise of USDA in developing streamlined 

metrics for assessment of program effectiveness, including measures in addition to child stunting such as geocentric yield analysis. 

The Committee is interested in USAID seeking recommendations 

from USDA for maximizing the efficacy of Farmer-to-Farmer and 

for developing a demonstration in a select few Feed the Future 

countries. The Committee notes that last year’s House Report directed USDA to enhance its participation in the Farmer-to-Farmer 

program by expanding the role of the agricultural officer in Target 

Countries, which are determined in accordance with the Global 

Food Security Act. The Committee notes that the agricultural officer can help improve the Farmer-to-Farmer program by determining what expertise is needed to overcome obstacles that impede 

local food production and incorporating insights from the field. The 

Committee directs that the USDA agricultural officer continue to 

work with USAID staff to achieve the food security goals of Farmer-to-Farmer. The Committee directs USDA to provide a briefing to 

the Committee on these efforts and how USDA can help maximize 

the efficacy of Farmer-to-Farmer. In addition, the Committee directs USAID to coordinate with USDA on incorporating the role of 

the agricultural officer to maximize the efficacy of the Farmer-toFarmer program. 

International Agricultural Education Fellowship.—The Committee provides $1,000,000 for this program as authorized in the 

2018 Farm Bill. The Committee is interested in exploring how this 

program can supplement ongoing efforts at the Foreign Agricultural Service. Prior to issuing any funding awards, the Committee 

directs USDA to brief the Committees on how the International Agricultural Education Fellowship program will work in collaboration 

with other ongoing Foreign Agricultural Service programs to 

achieve USDA’s goals. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
69 

U.S.-Central America, Mexico Cooperation.—The Committee directs FAS to work with its counterparts in Central America and 

Mexico to develop agricultural working groups focused on improving the efficiency of the agricultural inspection process and agricultural trade facilitation issues. In addition, FAS shall use existing 

programs for academic exchanges in agriculture-related fields of 

study in this region. The Committee directs FAS to brief the Committees on its efforts not later than 180 days after the enactment 

of this Act. 

FOOD FOR PEACE TITLE I DIRECT CREDIT AND FOOD FOR PROGRESS

PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $142,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 135,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 142,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +7,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For administrative expenses to carry out the credit program of 

Food for Peace Title I, Food for Peace Act, and the Food for 

Progress Act, the Committee provides an appropriation of $142,000. 

FOOD FOR PEACE TITLE II GRANTS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $1,500,000,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1,850,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +350,000,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +1,850,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Food for Peace Title II grants, the Committee provides 

$1,850,000,000, of which $365,000,000 is for non-emergency assistance. 

MCGOVERN-DOLE INTERNATIONAL FOOD FOR EDUCATION AND CHILD

NUTRITION PROGRAM GRANTS

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $210,255,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 235,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +24,745,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +235,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child 

Nutrition Program Grants, the Committee provides an appropriation of $235,000,000. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
70 

COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION EXPORT (LOANS)

CREDIT GUARANTEE PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $8,845,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 6,381,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 8,845,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. +2,464,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For administrative expenses of the Commodity Credit Corporation Export Loans Credit Guarantee Program Account, the Committee provides an appropriation of $8,845,000. 

TITLE VI 

RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG 

ADMINISTRATION 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Appropriation User fees Total, FDA S&E 

2019 Appropriation ........................................................................................... $3,068,678 $2,516,287 $5,584,965 

2020 Budget Estimate ...................................................................................... 3,239,524 2,594,418 5,833,942 

Provided in the bill ........................................................................................... 3,253,939 2,594,418 5,848,357 

Comparison: 

2019 Appropriation .................................................................................. +185,261 +78,131 +263,392 

2020 Budget Estimate ............................................................................. +14,415 – – – +14,415 

The Committee provides an appropriation of $3,253,939,000 in 

new budget authority for the FDA. In addition, the Committee recommends the following user fee amounts: $1,062,367,000—prescription drugs; $219,527,000—medical devices; $511,682,000—human 

generic drugs; $39,618,000—biosimilar biologicals; $30,524,000— 

animal drugs; $18,700,000—animal generic drugs; and 

$712,000,000—tobacco products. The combination of new budget 

authority and definite user fees provides the FDA with a total discretionary salaries and expenses level of $5,848,357,000. This total 

does not include permanent, indefinite user fees for: the Mammography Quality Standards Act; Export Certification; Priority Review 

Vouchers for Pediatric Disease; Food and Feed Recall; Food Reinspection; Voluntary Qualified Importer Program; the Third Party 

Auditor Program; and Outsourcing Facilities. 

The Committee recommendation includes a net increase of 

$185,261,000, including the full requested level for the following 

programs or initiatives: Medical Countermeasures Initiatives, Integrated Pathogen Reduction of the Blood Supply, Office of Laboratory Safety, Compounding, and Promoting Innovation and Emerging Technology While Maintaining Product Safety. In addition, the 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
71 

Transform Medical Device Safety, Cybersecurity, Review, and Innovation initiative is funded at the fiscal year 2019 level. 

The Committee does not accept proposed funding reductions for: 

foreign high-risk Inspections; the produce safety cooperative agreement funds with states; the Critical Path Initiative; and 

compounding bulk drug substances. 

The Committee recommendation does not include proposed user 

fees that are not authorized. It includes an appropriation for Overthe-Counter Monograph fees, contingent upon authorization. 

The Committee does not include funding for a civilian pay increase across the agency. Should the President provide a civilian 

pay increase for fiscal year 2020, it is assumed that the cost of such 

a pay increase will be absorbed within existing appropriations for 

fiscal year 2020. 

Animal Food Ingredients.—Animal food ingredients are reviewed 

and approved by the Center for Veterinary Medicine and is responsible for ensuring the safety of ingredients as they enter the marketplace for either food animal production or for pets. The Committee is concerned about the time associated with the ingredient 

review and approval process. To address this concern, the Committee includes an additional $2,000,000 to address reviews to enable innovation and address challenges and opportunities in the 

animal industry. 

Antimicrobial Drug Use.—In recent years, FDA has expanded 

antimicrobial drug sales and distribution reporting under Section 

105 of the Animal Drug User Fee Amendments of 2008 in an effort 

to further enhance FDA’s understanding of antimicrobial drug use 

in food-producing animals. The Committee firmly believes that efforts to combat antimicrobial resistance must take into consideration animal health and welfare, which in turn affect human 

health and food safety. The Committee supports the collection and 

reporting of accurate and validated data of antimicrobial drug use 

for food-producing animals, but is concerned that this reporting of 

antimicrobial sales and distribution data is being inappropriately 

equated to actual antimicrobial use data. The Committee acknowledges that the FDA sales and distribution summary report notes 

this same concern and cautions against using sales data as a proxy 

for actual drug use. The Committee also acknowledges the efforts 

of the FDA to collect actual antimicrobial use information through 

the establishment of cooperative agreements to collect use information for feedlot and dairy cattle, swine, chickens and turkeys. 

Therefore, the Committee encourages FDA to continue to seek alternative methods to better identify and reduce inappropriate antimicrobial drug uses. The Committee recognizes that not all antimicrobial drugs used in animal agriculture are involved in the potential for developing resistance mechanisms relevant to animal or 

human health. The Committee acknowledges FDA’s recent revisions of the sales and distribution summary report to more clearly 

differentiate medically important antimicrobials from those that 

are not medically important. However, the Committee encourages 

the Agency to continue to consider additional updates to the format 

of the annual summary report, based on stakeholder input, that 

will help to further differentiate medically important antimicrobial 

drugs from those that are not considered medically important and 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
72 

that are not relevant to the development of antimicrobial resistance 

mechanisms. 

Automated Compounding.—The Committee encourages FDA to 

review policies, regulations, and guidance to incorporate and 

incentivize the use of automation technology to enhance safety, improve accuracy, and facilitate compliance in drug compounding. 

Bacterial Risk Control Strategies for Blood Collection.—The Committee notes that FDA revised its draft guidance document on Bacterial Risk Control Strategies for Blood Collection Establishments 

and Transfusion Services in December 2018. The Committee appreciates FDA’s continued efforts to expeditiously publish a final guidance document. 

Blood Donor Procedures.—The Committee requests FDA continue 

to evaluate the current blood donation deferral policy and consider 

alternative procedures that would maintain the current level of 

safety and reduce the risk of HIV transmission through blood and 

blood components. The Committee is aware that in 2019 the interagency Transfusion Transmissible Infections Monitoring System 

(TTIMS) will assess prevalence, incidence, and risk factors for HIV 

infection among both first-time and repeat donors and assess time 

trends that may be associated with policy changes such as the current 12-month deferral. The Committee encourages FDA to work 

with the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute to analyze the 

TTIMS data to fully understand the risk factors that might expose 

a potential donor to blood-borne illness and adjust deferment questions if warranted. 

Cancer Immunotherapy Clinical Trials.—The Committee is 

aware of the remarkable promise of cancer immunotherapy and encouraged by the FDA’s recent approval of new treatments that harness this approach to fighting cancer. More than 1,500 immuno-oncology clinical trials are in some stage of development. As more patients turn to immune-based treatments, and more clinical trials 

are conducted to evaluate them, understanding how to recognize 

and manage the side effects of cancer immunotherapies will become 

increasingly important. Currently, however, standard parameters 

for reporting cancer immunotherapy-related adverse events in clinical trials are lacking, and this makes comparisons and management across studies challenging. The Committee, therefore, urges 

the FDA to work with the research community and the pharmaceutical industry to develop standardized templates for reporting 

toxicities in cancer immunotherapy clinical trials. 

Cannabidiol Regulatory Pathway.—The Committee is concerned 

about the proliferation of foods and dietary supplements marketed 

in violation of the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), including products containing cannabis and cannabis-derived ingredients. Non-FFDCA-compliant products pose potential health and 

safety risks to consumers through unsubstantiated and misleading 

claims such as treating a wide-range of life-threatening diseases 

and conditions; excessive cannabidiol (CBD) concentrations that 

can result in harmful drug-drug interactions, somnolence, and elevated transaminases or liver toxicity; and the presence of significant levels of intoxicating compounds such as tetrahydrocannabinols (THC). The 2018 Farm Bill expressly preserves 

FDA’s public health authority to take appropriate actions regarding 

cannabis, including hemp and its derivatives. The Committee recVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
73 

ognizes the FDA is considering a public regulatory process to evaluate the appropriateness, and possible parameters, of a regulatory 

pathway that would permit CBD in certain foods and dietary supplements. The Committee expects the FDA to assert its commitment to identifying lawful federal regulatory pathways for CBD 

foods and dietary supplements if such pathways are consistent with 

protection of the public health. Such pathways may include necessary public health and safety parameters that will protect the 

public health, such as labeling requirements and limits on CBD or 

other cannibis-derived ingredients in products, based upon anticipated total exposure levels. The Committee also expects the FDA 

to preserve the integrity of its drug development and approval 

processes, which ensures that products marketed for drug uses 

have undergone a rigorous scientific validation process demonstrating quality, safety and efficacy. It is also imperative that 

any FDA regulation of foods and dietary supplements containing 

CBD or other cannibis-derived ingredients preserve incentives to 

invest in robust clinical study of cannabis, so its therapeutic value 

can be more fully understood. 

Canned Tuna.—The Committee is concerned that FDA has not 

revised the standard of identity for canned tuna to adopt the 

drained weight fill of container standard despite having received 

two citizens petitions, as far back as 1994. FDA is directed to provide an update on the status of its review of the citizen petitions 

related to the standard of identity for canned tuna within 90 days. 

Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition Centers of Excellence.—The Committee is aware of the important contribution of 

the FDA Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition’s Centers of 

Excellence (COEs) program in supporting critical basic research as 

well as facilitating the implementation of the FDA Food Safety 

Modernization Act. The Committee encourages the Agency to continue to fully utilize the COEs to accomplish these goals, and instructs that it embrace its level of support for FDA Food Safety 

Modernization Act activities. 

Center for Veterinary Medicine Guidance Documents.—The FDA 

Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) recently updated its list of 

guidance topics to include possible new topics for consideration as 

well as revisions to existing CVM guidance documents. Additionally, the CVM 5-year Strategic Plan for Antimicrobial Stewardship 

in Veterinary Settings, released in September 2018, will require 

FDA guidance documents to direct the implementation of the stated goals. The Committee encourages FDA to seek input from relevant industry stakeholders and appropriate scientific experts who 

can assist FDA in the development of and any revision to guidance 

documents as well as for FDA to seek advice with these industry 

stakeholders on the best course for future guidance implementation. 

Chronic Pain.—Management of chronic pain often requires both 

non-pharmacological treatment as well as medicines. However, the 

current pharmacological options do not meet the needs of all patients, and additional treatments are needed. The Committee directs FDA to provide a brief on the progress of the development 

and advancement of non-opioid chronic pain therapies. 

Compounding Center of Excellence.—The Committee supports the 

development of the Compounding Center of Excellence, which exVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
74 

pands engagement with outsourcing facilities regarding good manufacturing practices, thereby helping these facilities adhere to the 

quality standards needed to protect patient health and support sector growth in small, underserved communities. The Committee encourages FDA to make concerted efforts to advise small 

compounders on how best to navigate regulations concerning distributing and dispensing practices, so these businesses may continue to adequately service local communities and individual patient needs. 

Continuous Manufacturing Initiative.—The Committee encourages FDA to explore partnering with existing non-profit entities 

with demonstrated capacity and experience on advanced manufacturing technologies to lower pharmaceutical costs. 

Corneal Crosslinking.—The Committee is aware that medical devices for the treatment of keratoconus are still being sold to U.S. 

physicians by multiple manufacturers for use in human patients 

without proper FDA authorization. The Committee is concerned 

that as many as 25% of all patients receiving corneal crosslinking 

procedures are put at risk by these non-approved devices. The 

Committee encourages FDA to investigate the manufacturers of 

these non-FDA approved devices, with specific regard to their marketing practices and medical claims, and to prohibit the utilization 

of non-FDA approved devices being used for corneal crosslinking 

procedures. 

Cosmetics Funding.—The Committee is concerned that FDA’s 

current authority and resources to oversee cosmetics and personal 

care products are inadequate to properly ensure the safety of cosmetics products. The Committee directs FDA to brief the Committee within 90 days of enactment of this Act on the staffing and 

budget resources it would need to improve its oversight of cosmetics, including whether the agency believes user fees would help 

to improve such oversight. The Committee provides an additional 

$4,000,000 for the Office of Cosmetics and Colors, within the FDA’s 

Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, to increase staffing 

and improve cosmetics safety oversight. 

Cosmetics Public Education.—The Committee is concerned about 

the dangers of known carcinogens that may be found in cosmetic 

products. The Committee urges the FDA to use a variety of communications tools to educate the public on the dangers of products for 

which a company fails to comply with a recall requested by the 

FDA. 

Cosmetic Safety.—The Committee strongly encourages FDA to 

continue taking steps towards ensuring the safety of cosmetics and 

continue to work with stakeholders and Congress to modernize the 

regulatory framework for cosmetics. The Committee requests a report within 180 days after enactment of this Act on what it would 

take for FDA to establish Good Manufacturing Practices for cosmetics, as a way to further ensure cosmetic safety. 

Critical Path Initiative.—Innovation in the development of new 

medicines and other therapies can be enhanced by enabling FDA 

to focus on specific program areas such as those outlined in FDA’s 

Critical Path Initiative and its Regulatory Science objectives. These 

types of programs, which FDA often accomplishes through publicprivate partnerships, expand the knowledge base for those developing medical products and those conducting regulatory review. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
75 

Dairy Standard of Identity.—The Committee is pleased that the 

FDA has begun a deliberative process to review how it will enforce 

the standards of identity for dairy products. The Committee continues to hear concerns with the labeling of certain foods and beverages as dairy products when the products are plant-based rather 

than derived from an animal. As such, the Committee urges the 

FDA to continue its work toward ultimately enforcing standards of 

identity for dairy products. 

Dairy Standard of Identity for Certain Products.—The Committee 

understands that, as part of FDA’s Nutrition Innovation Strategy 

and its review of the standards of identity for dairy products, the 

agency is considering modifications to its standards of identity 

based on changes in food technology and nutritional science. To 

promote this objective, the Committee directs the FDA to consult 

and meet with members of the dairy industry to discuss the need 

for a standard of identity for dairy products that do not contain the 

A1 beta casein protein. 

Dietary Supplements.—Within the increases provided for the 

Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, the Committee provides an additional $3,000,000 for the Office of Dietary Supplement 

Programs (ODSP). More than half of Americans take at least one 

dietary supplement each day, with use particularly prevalent 

among older persons and in children. The Committee applauds 

FDA’s inspection of and enforcement actions against manufacturers 

of dietary supplement products that contain ingredients that are 

potentially harmful or otherwise noncompliant with the law, but 

recognizes more resources are needed to regulate products that are 

contaminated either intentionally or unintentionally with inherently unsafe ingredients, including active pharmaceutical ingredients. The Committee has been pleased with the interagency collaborations and urges FDA to continue working with the Department of Justice to remove illegal dietary supplements from the 

market. The Committee directs these increased resources toward 

enforcement of DSHEA, including inspection and enforcement activities. 

Drug Compounding and Revised Draft MOU.—The Committee 

appreciates the revisions made to the new draft MOU for human 

compounding, released in September 2018 by the FDA. The Committee encourages FDA, before the revised draft is finalized, FDA 

to work with stakeholders, including state boards of pharmacy, 

with the goal of having most, if not all, states supporting the MOU. 

Drug Compounding Pharmacist on Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee.—The Committee recognizes that the Pharmacy 

Compounding Advisory Committee established under the Drug 

Quality and Security Act (DQSA) needs to adequately represent the 

interests and needs of providers and patients who use and depend 

on compounded medications. Compounding is often practiced in 

community settings. It is therefore vital that voting members of 

PCAC have a thorough understanding of compounding in a community setting in order to appropriately advise FDA. The Committee 

encourages FDA to appoint qualified voting members with recent, 

actual, and diverse experience in the preparation, prescribing, and 

use of compounded medications. 

DQSA Implementation.—The Committee is aware of concerns 

about FDA’s implementation of the DQSA as it relates to USP dieVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
76 

tary supplement monographs. The Committee directs FDA to provide a briefing the Committee on this issue. 

Drug Supply Chain Security Act.—The Committee is aware that 

the FDA is more than three years late in meeting its statutory obligation to establish a Federal licensing standard for third-party logistics providers and wholesale distributors. Congress mandated 

FDA complete this effort by 2015 under the Drug Supply Chain Security Act. This provision was intended to set federal standards to 

govern licensing for all third-party logistics providers and wholesale distributors, helping to strengthen FDA’s and states’ ability to 

ensure the security of the drug supply chain. The Committee directs the FDA to issue its proposed rule-making to fulfill this requirement without delay. 

Epinephrine Auto Injector Shortage.—The Committee is concerned by the national shortage of epinephrine auto injectors, 

which pose a serious threat to those at risk of allergic reactions. 

The Committee is encouraged by FDA’s actions to address availability of these drugs, both by approving a new generic and safely 

extending the expiration dates for existing medications. The Committee urges FDA to aggressively combat this drug shortage to ensure epinephrine auto injectors are readily available to meet the 

growing number of prescriptions. 

Electrical Stimulation Devices.—The Committee is concerned 

about the delay in issuing a final rule prohibiting the use of electrical stimulation devices on persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities, especially in light of the agency’s statement 

that ‘‘these products present an unreasonable and substantial risk 

to public health.’’ Given this risk, the Committee directs the agency 

to issue the final rule no later than December 31, 2019, consistent 

with the Spring 2019 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions. 

FDA Partnerships under FSMA.—The purpose of FSMA is to reform the nation’s food safety laws to ensure a safe public food supply. As FDA continues implementation of FSMA, the Committee 

encourages FDA to work in partnership with existing government 

food safety programs through MOUs to verify compliance with 

FSMA rules once they are finalized as a way to eliminate duplication of activities under the law. 

FDARA Section 902 Reports.—The Committee appreciates FDA’s 

adherence to Section 902 of the FDA Reauthorization Act which requires an annual report on inspections. The Committee requests 

that FDA provide it with a separate report on the median time, following a request from staff of the FDA reviewing an application to 

the beginning of the inspection, that lists the median time for generic drugs and new drugs separately. 

Food Additives.—There are more than 10,000 additives to preserve or modify the taste, appearance and nutrients in food. The 

Committee is concerned about potential effects of food additives on 

children and requests a report on the effects of direct and indirect 

food additives currently listed as generally recognized as safe on 

the behavioral health of children. 

Food Contact Notification User Fees.—The funds made available 

by this Act include sufficient monies to fund the Food and Drug 

Administration’s Food Contact Notification Program and shall be 

deemed to satisfy the requirements of 21 U.S.C. 348(h)(5)(A). 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
77 

Food Facility Inspections.—The Committee is aware of the September 2017 Office of Inspector General (OIG) report that outlined 

deficiencies in FDA’s inspections of domestic food facilities. The 

Committee is concerned that the overall number of domestic food 

facilities that FDA inspected since the passage of FSMA has decreased from a high of about 19,000 facilities in 2011 to 16,000 facilities in 2015, the most recent year for which data is available. 

The Committee notes that FDA has failed to provide Congress with 

mandated Food Safety Modernization Act annual reports with data 

on foreign and domestic food facility inspections, inspections of food 

imports, and the status of FDA foreign offices for the last six consecutive fiscal years. The FDA is urged to finalize these delayed reports and submit them to Congress within 180 days. 

Food Safety and the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) 

Funding.—The Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a 

report in January 2019 entitled ‘‘Food Safety and Nutrition: FDA 

Can Build on Existing Efforts to Measure Progress and Implement 

Key Activities.’’ The report documents spending and shows a steady 

increase in spending for food safety. A majority of this spending relates to activities surrounding FSMA development and implementation activities. FSMA implementation places additional requirements on state governments and private stakeholders, and therefore urges the FDA to provide sufficient resources to state and nonprofit education and inspection programs to address these needs. 

Foodborne Illness.—Reducing incidents of foodborne illness is an 

important public health goal. The Committee believes that coordinated and targeted resources are required to appropriately assess 

and combat the public health risks of foodborne pathogens. The 

Committee is aware that FDA is in the process of finalizing guidance regarding Listeria monocytogenes (Lm) in foods under its jurisdiction. Reducing the incidence of listeriosis is an important public health goal and the Committee supports efforts to accomplish 

this objective. The Committee urges FDA to define not ready-to-eat 

foods in guidance in a manner that aligns with the approach of 

USDA’s FSIS and is protective of public health and is sciencebased, practical, and achievable. The Committee also urges FDA to 

consider all available information relevant to the risk of listeriosis, 

including available exposure models, outbreak data, dose-response 

models, and existing risk assessments, in finalizing compliance policy guidance that would establish any final action level of Lm in 

ready-to-eat foods, and to make sure that the guidance is protective 

of public health, science-based, practical, and achievable. Additionally, the Committee continues its direction that FDA, in consultation with NIFA, work to coordinate ongoing and future research 

grant programs addressing foodborne pathogens to ensure that 

NIFA grant programs address FDA research priorities, and directs 

USDA to report back to the Committee within 90 days of enactment of this Act on its progress toward this goal. 

Foreign High-Risk Inspection.—The Committee maintains funding for foreign high-risk inspections to allow FDA to continue efforts to develop and utilize a targeted, risk-based, and efficient inspection model that incorporates commercially available information, including onsite facility verification, about all foreign establishments for the purpose of regulatory compliance and surveillance 

of manufacturing quality management practices. FDA is directed to 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
78 

provide the Committees with an update on these efforts, including 

estimated efficiencies and concerns and plans to continue or expand 

this effort in the future. 

Generic Competition.—The Committee recognizes the important 

role generic drug competition plays in the U.S. healthcare marketplace. The Committee supports ongoing efforts at FDA facilitating 

the approval of safe and effective generic drugs, including the agency’s efforts in approving competitive generic therapies, and providing product-specific guidance to facilitate the approval of generic 

drugs, including complex generic drugs. The Committee recognizes 

the record-breaking number of generic approvals in 2018 and encourages FDA to continue its efforts to ensure appropriate generic 

drug competition in the marketplace. 

Generic Harmonization.—The Committee supports FDA’s efforts 

to harmonize scientific and technical standards for generic applications with other nations to reduce regulatory burden and 

incentivize competition. The Committee also supports efforts to facilitate the international harmonization of drug manufacturing facility standards and mutual recognition of international inspections, which can help improve standards for the pharmaceutical 

supply chain worldwide. The Committee requests FDA brief the 

Committee within 90 days of the enactment of this Act on the steps 

the agency has taken on these efforts, which foreign regulators are 

being consulted, and approximate timelines by which the agency 

expects to implement changes. 

Glass Packaging.—The Committee urges FDA to continue to 

work with glass packaging suppliers and pharmaceutical manufacturers to evaluate and promote streamlined approval requirements 

designed to expedite the adoption and use of innovative glass packaging technologies with the capacity to improve product quality, reduce product recalls, reduce drug shortages, and protect public 

health. Such streamlined approval requirements should address 

stability testing and other relevant types of data to be submitted 

in support of product approval. 

Homeopathic Draft Guidance.—The Committee urges FDA to 

consider the views of patients in finalizing its draft guidance. 

Imported seafood safety.—As FDA noted in its February 2019 report, ‘‘FDA Strategy for the Safety of Imported Food,’’ 94 percent 

of seafood consumed in the U.S. is now imported. One of FDA’s 

major responsibilities is to protect consumers from the risks of imports, which have been increasing by 5 to 10 percent per year for 

the last decade. It is also FDA’s policy to ensure that all products 

regulated by the agency must meet the same requirements, whether imported or domestic. While it is encouraging that FDA uses 

various regulatory methods to ensure the safety of imported seafood, such as the Foreign Supplier Verification Program, the Import 

Certification Program, and new FSMA regulations and tools, the 

best source of knowledge is the physical examination of the product 

itself. Due to the dramatic increase in imported seafood, the Committee provides a one-time increase of $5,000,000 to conduct a pilot 

using Machine Learning to develop a screening model for imported 

seafood shipments. This would include physical examination of imported seafood covering both chemical and microbiological samples 

and representative of product and import regions. FDA is directed 

to report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriation on 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
79 

the results of the pilot as well as recommendations on how the 

Agency may improve upon the safety of such imports, if warranted. 

Local Port Cooperation.—The Committee directs the FDA to 

work with local governments at high volume ports of entry to explore activities which reduce the risk of food borne illnesses and 

enhance the capacity of local officials in dealing with food borne 

threats. FDA is requested to report back to the Committee within 

90 days of enactment of this Act on its efforts. 

Lower-Cost Insulin Products and Transition to the Biologics Price 

Competition and Innovation Act Approval Pathway.—To ensure patient access to lower-cost insulin, the Committee urges FDA to undertake the following measures: (1) ensure any pending application 

for a proposed insulin product with a goal date prior to March 23, 

2020 is reviewed in accordance with the ‘‘Program for Enhanced 

Review Transparency and Communication for NME NDAs and 

Original BLAs’’ (‘‘the Program’’), (2) work to identify and promote 

efficiencies in the review of any application submitted under the 

Public Health Service Act for a proposed insulin product that previously was submitted under the FFDCA with a goal date prior to 

March 23, 2020, and that failed to meet the requirements for final 

approval under the FFDCA by March 23, 2020, and (3) act quickly 

to evaluate stakeholder feedback and recommendations from its 

May 13, 2019 public meeting on the future of insulin biosimilars. 

Mammography Exam Reports.—In November 2011, the National 

Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory Committee approved a 

change to the mammogram patient report and physician report to 

include information regarding an individual’s breast density, yet 

this process has not been completed. The Committee continues to 

urge the FDA to implement this change in an expedited manner 

and to brief the Committees on the status of this change. 

Menu Labeling Education Campaign.—The Committee supports 

the goals of the Nutrition Innovation Strategy for an educational 

campaign for consumers surrounding both menu labeling and the 

updated Nutrition Facts panel and includes $2,000,000 to support 

this activity. 

Naloxone to Treat Over-usage of Opioids.—United States public 

health agencies have appropriately highlighted the risk of overdose 

from doses of opioids greater than 90 morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per day. Also concerning are the hundreds of millions 

of prescriptions each year of immediate release (IR) lower MME 

opioids such as hydrocodone and oxycodone. These opioids are commonly associated with abuse and are a common pathway to addiction and also present a risk of overdose. Some states have begun 

to limit the prescribing of these IR opioids. An additional consideration might be to assess the benefit of co-prescribing naloxone with 

IR and extended release (ER) opioids. Prescribers including dentists and other primary care providers have an opportunity to become more attuned to the risks of all opioids through the consideration of co-prescribing naloxone with each opioid prescription. The 

Committee encourages FDA to develop a strategy to test this hypothesis and assess the benefit for enacting such a policy as a national strategy. 

National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System 

(NARMS).—The Committee provides an additional $2,000,000 for 

NARMS, a national public health surveillance system that tracks 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
80 

changes in the antimicrobial susceptibility of enteric bacteria found 

in people, meats, and food animals in the United States. 

Non-Human Primates.—The Committee commends the FDA for 

its work to reduce research on non-human primates and relocate 

non-human primates no longer needed in research to sanctuary. 

The Committee directs the FDA to deliver a report within 12 

months of enactment of this Act that outlines a strategy, including 

a detailed timeline, for the reduction and replacement of nonhuman primates in FDA intramural testing and research with suitable alternative models. The report should also detail plans for the 

relocation of non-human primates no longer needed in FDA research to appropriate sanctuaries. 

Nutrient Value of Fish During Pregnancy.—In light of the directive included in section 773 of Division B of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019 (P.L. 116–6), the Agency shall continue coordinating with the Environmental Protection Agency to reissue 

the final fish consumption advice for pregnant women provided in 

the notice of availability entitled ‘‘Advice About Eating Fish, From 

the Environmental Protection Agency and Food and Drug Administration; Revised Fish Advice; Availability’’ (82 Fed. Reg. 6571 (January 19, 2017)). The reissuance of this advice will assist pregnant 

women in making informed decisions on fish consumption during 

pregnancy, especially as it relates to the positive cognitive development of the child. 

Office Use Compounding.—The Committee continues to hear concerns that FDA has implemented and enforced the DQSA through 

guidance for industry documents rather than through the notice 

and comment rulemaking procedure called for by the underlying 

statute and the Administrative Procedures Act. The Committee requests a briefing from FDA on this issue. 

Olive Oil Standards of Identity.—Because of the substantial interest in and consumption of olive oil throughout the United States, 

driven in part by the significant scientifically-confirmed health benefits of these oils, and the fact that the United States has become 

a globally-important producer of olive oils, especially extra virgin 

olive oil, the Committee directs FDA to establish a separate U.S. 

Standard of Identity for different grades of olive oil (e.g. extra virgin, virgin, and refined) and olive-pomace oils. As the Committee 

is particularly concerned with the number of different oil state 

standards for olive oils in the U.S., it is important to determine if 

establishing a uniform set of the standards would better inform 

and protect consumers. FDA is directed to consult and meet with 

domestic producers and importers of olive oil to develop a sciencebased Standard of Identity for extra virgin olive oil and olive oil to 

ensure the integrity of these products for U.S. consumers. 

Opioid Abuse.—The abuse, misuse, and diversion of opioid painkillers continue to drive an epidemic in the United States. The 

CDC indicates that one American loses his or her battle with addiction every twelve and a half minutes. The Committee continues to 

be pleased that, with the Opioids Action Plan, Opioid Policy Steering Committee, and several significant regulatory actions, FDA is 

doing its part to help stem the tide of abuse. The use of opioids as 

first-line therapies for any form of pain has led to over-prescribing, 

and the CDC has made clear that clinicians should consider opioid 

therapy only if expected benefits for both pain and function are anVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
81 

ticipated to outweigh the risks to the patient. The Committee hopes 

that FDA will continue to support the development of alternative 

and non-addictive alternatives to opioid analgesics and, when 

opioids are medically necessary, will continue to incentivize development and use of abuse-deterrent formulations. The Committee 

notes that every patient’s treatment regimen should be tailored by 

his or her doctor to his or her unique needs. The federal government, therefore, should promote the full suite of available treatment options, including abstinence-based models and non-opioid 

medications. Finally, the Committee continues to be supportive of 

naloxone distribution among trained, licensed healthcare professionals and emergency responders. When considering the appropriateness of providing naloxone over-the-counter, the Committee 

urges the FDA to ensure that the administration of naloxone serves 

as a point of intervention to spur an honest conversation between 

the patient and his doctor about addiction and treatment. 

OTC Acetaminophen Dosing Information for Children.—The 

Committee is concerned that the lack of dosing information for children ages six months to two years may lead to dosing errors, adverse events, and inadequate treatment of fever and pain. The FDA 

is urged to update the monograph label for acetaminophen to include weight-based dosing instructions for children ages six months 

to two years and provide to the Committee not later than 180 days 

after the enactment of this Act a report on why action has not been 

taken based on the recommendation of two of its advisory committees. 

Patient Experience in Drug Reviews.—The Committee is aware 

the FDA is implementing policies to promote public access to information about how patient experience information factored into the 

review of approved products. The Committee supports this step forward and encourages FDA to continue refining the instrument and 

ways to improve its visibility. The Committee also requests that 

FDA consider ways to include patient-experience information in 

relevant labeling and accompanying documentation to inform patient/provider decision making and payer determinations. 

Patient-Focused Drug Development Initiative.—The Committee 

supports the goals of the Patient-Focused Drug Development Initiative. The Committee notes that alopecia areata is included in this 

initiative. 

Pediatric Devices.—The Committee is aware of the success of the 

FDA’s Pediatric Device Consortia (PDC) and the Center for Devices 

and Radiological Health’s (CDRH) interest in developing a collaborative community related to pediatric devices. However, the Committee is concerned the CDRH does not have the necessary resources to properly leverage the benefits of the PDC program and 

a collaborative community. Therefore, the Committee provides an 

increase of $1,000,000 for the PDC program to improve infrastructure for conducting pediatric device trials and the planning of a related Pediatric Device collaborative community. 

Pediatric IBD.—The Committee commends FDA for convening a 

workshop in November 2018 to examine barriers to drug development for pediatric IBD, including clinical trials, and recognizes the 

work done so far to identify the variables that impede trial participation. To advance this work, the Committee strongly encourages 

FDA to partner with stakeholders including patient advocates, 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
82 

healthcare professionals, researchers, and industry to establish a 

working group to develop a plan for reducing barriers to pediatric 

IBD clinical trial participation and drug development. 

Pentobarbital in Pet Food.—The Committee is aware that pet 

food containing any level of pentobarbital is a violation of the 

FFDCA. Still, pet food products containing pentobarbital managed 

to reach consumer shelves and affect the lives of pets before being 

recalled. Lethargy, seizure, and death are only a few of the side effects pet owners grapple with should their pet become ill due to pet 

food pentobarbital contamination. FDA is directed to report to the 

Committees on their findings of any current FDA studies of pet 

food pentobarbital contaminations and what FDA is doing to reduce 

contamination risks. 

Pesticide Residues in Imported Human Food.—The Committee is 

concerned that imported human food continues to have higher pesticide violation rates than domestically produced food. The Committee recognizes that identifying a high violation rate for an imported commodity attests to FDA’s sampling design. However, such 

differences between domestic and import violation rates are concerning. The Committee directs FDA to analyze data in preparation 

of its next annual report to assess whether giving special attention 

to certain imported products with significantly higher rates of violations compared to domestic products would change the planning 

of the pesticide sampling plan for future years. 

Pet Food Imports.—The Committee appreciates the significant investigational effort over the past several years into reported pet illnesses associated with jerky pet treats. The Committee awaits the 

final summary paper detailing FDA work on jerky pet treats. 

Rare Cancer Therapeutics.—FDA’s Oncology Center of Excellence 

was formed to streamline the development of cancer therapies. It 

creates a unified and collaborative scientific environment to advance the development and regulation of oncology products for cancer patients. However, there continues to be a significant development gap for rare cancer therapies. Therefore, the Committee includes an additional $5,000,000 to address gaps in the system, 

streamline resources, accelerate the development of rare cancer 

therapies and advance the field of cancer research overall, mirroring the efforts of the National Cancer Institute’s Developmental 

Therapeutics Program. FDA is directed to build lines of communications and processes between these two agencies in order to expedite review of rare cancer therapies. 

Real World Evidence.—In the 21st Century Cures Act, Congress 

expressed support for the use of real-world evidence and directed 

FDA to create a comprehensive plan for how to advance efforts for 

its use in regulatory decision making. Congress commends FDA on 

the progress it has made on this initiative thus far and urges continued focus on expansion of the use of real-world evidence. Realworld evidence has many uses, including identifying real-time 

opioid prescribing patterns across the country, creating proactive 

drug safety monitoring and patient safety regimes, helping to interpret and complement the clinical trial process, and allowing for less 

costly and quicker drug development. Congress hopes to see continued advances at FDA in this important area and appropriate use 

of real-world Evidence, particularly in regulatory decision making. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
83 

Sesame.—The Committee is concerned with the growing prevalence and severity of sesame allergies and commends the FDA for 

issuing a request for information on adding sesame to the list of 

major allergens. The Committee requests a report within 90 days 

of enactment on the status of the review of the data received under 

the request for information. The report shall include a timeline of 

when comments will be fully reviewed, recommendations and conclusions based on this review, and a detailed plan of action on proposed rulemaking. 

Standard of Identity Activities for Foods.—Of the amount provided for the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, the 

Committee provides an increase of $3,000,000 for the Office of Nutrition and Food Labeling to prioritize efforts regarding standards 

of identity and related product labeling. 

Sunscreen Ingredients.—The Committee continues to track the 

actions of the FDA related to sunscreen ingredients. The Committee recognizes the agency’s efforts in generating and posting 

consumer and public health resources regarding health benefits of 

sunscreen use. The Committee urges FDA to clarify its messaging 

concerning currently marketed sunscreen ingredients to ensure the 

continued use of sunscreens. In addition, the Committee encourages FDA to work with stakeholders. 

Systems for Investigations, Recalls, Compliance and Enforcement 

(SIRCE) Investment.—The Committee understands that the Office 

of Regulatory Affairs (ORA) is undergoing an effort to replace aging 

and segmented data systems through the SIRCE contract. The 

Committee directs ORA to report back on the status of SIRCE investments and, whenever practicable, to ensure that funding for 

technology systems support the establishment of an interoperable, 

comprehensive program. 

The Real Cost.—The Committee supports FDA’s ‘‘The Real Cost’’ 

youth e-cigarette prevention campaign which to date has been directed at youth ages 12–17, and directs the FDA to explore expanding the advertising to the general public. 

Traceability of food.—The Committee is aware that FDA has not 

put forward a comprehensive food-traceability system. The Committee directs FDA to work with stakeholders on a wide-scale 

traceability system that could help companies and government 

agencies more rapidly access data crucial to tracking foods implicated in disease outbreaks and subject to recalls. 

Track and Trace.—Public Law 111–31 required FDA to implement a national track and trace system on the manufacture and 

flow of tobacco products to ensure compliance with tobacco product 

standards and disrupt illicit trade and counterfeiting. FDA has yet 

to fully meet this requirement. The Committee directs FDA to provide not later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act a report on the status of track and trace rulemaking as it applies to 

tobacco products, including ENDS and nicotine components. 

Unapproved Stem Cell Products.—The Committee appreciates 

the enforcement actions against clinics for marketing unapproved 

stem cell products. The Committee encourages the FDA to continue 

prioritizing enforcement actions against businesses that illicitly 

market unapproved products to patients and to continue to coordinate with the Federal Trade Commission to optimize its enforcement and consumer education activities. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
84 

Youth E-cigarette Use.—The Committee is troubled by the dramatic increase in youth e-cigarette use and notes that flavors are 

the most common reason youth use e-cigarettes. The Committee 

urges FDA to expedite the pre-market review of e-cigarettes and 

other newly deemed tobacco products that were on the market as 

of August 8, 2016 and to remove from the market any deemed tobacco product introduced after August 8, 2016 that has not undergone a pre-market review. 

BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $11,788,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 11,788,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 11,788,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Buildings and Facilities of the Food and Drug Administration, the Committee provides $11,788,000. 

FDA INNOVATION ACCOUNT, CURES ACT

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $70,000,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 75,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 75,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +5,000,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the FDA Innovation Account as authorized in the 21st Century Cures Act, the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$75,000,000. 

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

2019 appropriation ............................................................................. $268,000,000 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... 315,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 315,000,000 

Comparison: 

2019 appropriation ...................................................................... +47,000,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the 

Committee provides an appropriation of $315,000,000, of which 

$57,000,000 is for the purchase of IT and $3,386,000 is for the Inspector General. 

Aluminum.—The Committee is aware of concerns about pricing 

by aluminum end users. It is the CFTC’s mission to protect market 

users and the public from fraud, manipulation, and abusive practices related to the sale of commodity and financial futures and options, and to foster open, competitive, and financially sound futures 

and options markets. The Committee therefore requests that the 

CFTC report back no later than 90 days after enactment of the bill 

on the state of the aluminum futures markets. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
85 

Cross-Border Harmonization.—The Committee strongly encourages the CFTC to work with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to harmonize the definition of a ‘‘U.S. person.’’ Currently, the definition of a ‘‘U.S. person’’ differs between the two 

agencies, which can result in operational challenges and potentially 

different regulatory treatment of entities transacting in otherwise 

similar instruments. Global firms face significant costs and burdens if the CFTC’s and SEC’s regulatory approaches produce different outcomes regarding whether an entity or transaction would 

be subject to the Dodd-Frank Act. Derivatives transactions for 

swaps and security-based swaps that are traded typically by the 

same trading desk or desks should not be analyzed differently. The 

Committee urges these agencies to work together in an expeditious 

manner toward a consistent definition of a U.S. person. 

Virtual Currency Monitoring.—The advent of virtual currency 

markets has presented several new challenges for the Commission 

in its efforts to carry out its mission. Each virtual currency derivatives contract currently ties its price in some way, through various 

settlement processes, to prices of virtual currency on certain cash 

market platforms. This underlying virtual currency cash market is 

relatively nascent, and the platforms operating in the cash market 

remain largely unregulated, with the Commission having only limited enforcement authority over the cash market. Those features of 

the underlying cash market platforms have led the Commission to 

note multiple risks to the markets. Therefore, the Committee encourages the Commission’s ongoing efforts, in coordination with 

other financial regulators such as the Securities and Exchange 

Commission, to continue monitoring virtual currencies, including 

Bitcoin futures contracts, and to detect, investigate, and prosecute 

fraud and manipulation in these markets. The Commission is directed to prepare a report on how to better protect virtual currency 

investors and promote American competitiveness in this evolving 

global marketplace. This report should include, but is not limited 

to, a discussion of how to protect investors against fraud and manipulation involving virtual currency. This report is to be made 

available on the Commission website within 270 days of the date 

of enactment of this Act. 

FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

2019 limitation .................................................................................... ($74,600,000) 

2020 budget estimate ......................................................................... (76,000,000) 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. (76,000,000) 

Comparison: 

2019 limitation ............................................................................ +1,400,000 

2020 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the limitation on the expenses of the Farm Credit Administration (FCA), the Committee provides $76,000,000. 

Public/private partnerships.—The Committee recognizes the 

value of public/private partnerships in financing rural community 

facilities and other similar projects, as well as the role the Farm 

Credit System (FCS) can play in expanding these partnerships. The 

Committee also recognizes that the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
86 

amended, provides authority for FCS institutions to make investments in vital rural community facilities and supports improving 

the Farm Credit Administration’s current process of approving 

these investments. To help the Committee consider ways it can encourage these partnerships, the Farm Credit Administration is directed to report back to the Committee within 120 days of the date 

of enactment of this Act on the current ways in which the FCS participates in these partnerships and on options to enhance and expand FCS’s lending and investment opportunities to increase these 

partnerships and investment projects in rural America. 

TITLE VII 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS AND TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

The following general provisions are included in the bill: 

Section 701.—The bill includes language regarding motor vehicles. 

Section 702.—The bill includes language regarding the Working 

Capital Fund of the Department of Agriculture. 

Section 703.—The bill includes language limiting funding provided in the bill to one year unless otherwise specified. 

Section 704.—The bill includes language regarding nonprofit institutions. 

Section 705.—The bill includes language regarding Rural Development programs. 

Section 706.—The bill includes language regarding information 

technology systems. 

Section 707.—The bill includes language regarding fund availability. 

Section 708.—The bill includes language regarding Rural Utilities Service program eligibility. 

Section 709.—The bill includes language regarding funds for information technology expenses. 

Section 710.—The bill includes language prohibiting first-class 

airline travel. 

Section 711.—The bill includes language regarding the availability of certain funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation. 

Section 712.—The bill includes language regarding funding for 

advisory committees. 

Section 713.—The bill includes language regarding IT system 

regulations. 

Section 714.—The bill includes language regarding Section 32 activities. 

Section 715.—The bill includes language regarding user fee proposals without offsets. 

Section 716.—The bill includes language regarding the reprogramming of funds for USDA. 

Section 717.—The bill includes language regarding the reprogramming of funds and notification requirements for FDA and 

CFTC. 

Section 718.—The bill includes language regarding fees for the 

guaranteed business and industry loan program. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
87 

Section 719.—The bill includes language regarding the appropriations hearing process. 

Section 720.—The bill includes language regarding governmentsponsored news stories. 

Section 721.—The bill includes language regarding details and 

assignments of Department of Agriculture employees. 

Section 722.—The bill includes language regarding eligibility for 

Rural Development programs. 

Section 723.—The bill includes language requiring spend plans. 

Section 724.—The bill includes language regarding certain USDA 

balances. 

Section 725.—The bill includes language regarding rural housing 

loans. 

Section 726.—The bill includes language regarding USDA loan 

programs. 

Section 727.—The bill includes language regarding the Working 

Capital Fund. 

Section 728.—The bill includes language regarding SNAP variety. 

Section 729.—The bill includes language regarding housing loan 

programs. 

Section 730.—The bill includes language regarding consumer information. 

Section 731.—The bill includes language regarding FDA regulations. 

Section 732.—The bill includes language regarding Food for 

Peace. 

Section 733.—The bill includes language regarding Rural Development energy program. 

Section 734.—The bill includes language regarding USDA regulations. 

Section 735.—The bill includes language regarding FDA regulations. 

Section 736.—The bill includes language regarding animal welfare. 

Section 737.—The bill includes language regarding United States 

iron and steel products. 

Section 738.—The bill includes language regarding lobbying. 

Section 739.—The bill includes language regarding poultry products. 

Section 740.—The bill includes language regarding certain inspection activities. 

Section 741.—The bill includes language regarding Rural Development programs. 

Section 742.—The bill includes language regarding poultry products. 

Section 743.—The bill includes language regarding child nutrition programs. 

Section 744.—The bill includes language regarding low-income 

communities. 

Section 745.—The bill includes language regarding citrus greening. 

Section 746.—The bill includes language regarding grape 

varietals. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
88 

Section 747.—The bill includes language regarding school lunch 

programs. 

Section 748.—The bill includes language regarding rural 

broadband. 

Section 749.—The bill includes language regarding the National 

Institute of Food and Agriculture. 

Section 750.—The bill includes language regarding school breakfast programs. 

Section 751.—The bill includes language regarding FDA regulations. 

Section 752.—The bill includes language regarding Centers of 

Excellence. 

Section 753.—The bill includes language regarding assistance to 

rural hospitals. 

Section 754.—The bill includes language regarding disaster assistance. 

Section 755.—The bill includes language regarding certain USDA 

balances. 

Section 756.—The bill includes language regarding the organic 

program. 

Section 757.—The bill includes language regarding demonstration projects for Tribes. 

Section 758.—The bill includes language regarding USDA agencies. 

Section 759.—The bill includes language regarding USDA agencies. 

Section 760.—The bill includes language regarding animal welfare. 

Section 761.—The bill includes language regarding fellowships. 

Section 762.—The bill includes language regarding certain research programs. 

Section 763.—The bill includes language regarding the school 

breakfast programs. 

Section 764.—The bill includes language regarding farm ownership. 

Section 765.—The bill includes language regarding Rural Development loans. 

Section 766.—The bill includes language regarding research facilities. 

Section 767.—The bill includes language regarding research programs. 

Section 768.—The bill includes language regarding urban agriculture. 

Section 769.—The bill includes language regarding food loss. 

Section 770.—The bill includes language regarding nutrition programs. 

Section 771.—The bill includes language regarding pollinator research. 

Section 772.—The bill includes language regarding training and 

outreach. 

Section 773.—The bill includes language regarding assistance to 

Tribal students. 

Section 774.—The bill includes language regarding research programs. 

Section 775.—The bill includes language regarding farm loans. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
89 

Section 776.—The bill includes language regarding a Nutrition 

Assistance Program study. 

Section 777.—The bill includes language regarding micro-grants 

for food security. 

Section 778.—The bill includes language regarding gene editing. 

Section 779.—The bill includes language regarding swine inspections. 

Section 780.—The bill includes language regarding Job Corps Civilian Conservation Centers. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS 

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House 

of Representatives, the results of each roll call vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with the names of those 

voting for and those against, are printed below: 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
90 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 017 here HR107.001
91 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 018 here HR107.002
92 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is a statement of general performance goals and objectives for which this measure authorizes funding: 

The Committee on Appropriations considers program performance, including a program’s success in developing and attaining 

outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding recommendations. 

PROGRAM DUPLICATION

No provision of this bill establishes or reauthorizes a program of 

the Federal Government known to be duplicative of another Federal program, a program that was included in any report from the 

Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to section 

21 of Public Law 111–139, or a program related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. 

TRANSFERS OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following list includes the transfers of unexpended balances included in the accompanying bill: 

1. Office of the Secretary.—The bill allows funds within the account to be transferred among the offices included in the account. 

2. Departmental Administration.—The bill requires reimbursement for expenses related to certain hearings. 

3. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations 

and Intergovernmental Affairs.—The bill allows a portion of the 

funds appropriated to the Office of the Assistant Secretary to be 

transferred to agencies. 

4. Hazardous Materials Management.—The bill allows the funds 

appropriated to the Department for hazardous materials management to be transferred to agencies of the Department as required. 

5. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.—Authority is included to enable the Secretary of Agriculture to transfer from other 

appropriations or funds of the Department such sums as may be 

necessary to combat emergency outbreaks of certain diseases of 

animals, plants, and poultry. 

6. Funds for Strengthening Markets, Income, and Supply.—The 

bill limits the transfer of section 32 funds to purposes specified in 

the bill. 

7. Farm Production and Conservation (FPAC) Business Center.— The bill allows certain funds to be merged with the salaries and 

expenses account for the FPAC Business Center. 

8. Farm Service Agency Salaries and Expenses.—The bill provides that funds provided to other accounts in the agency may be 

advanced to and merged with the salaries and expenses account of 

the Farm Service Agency. 

9. Dairy Indemnity Program.—The bill authorizes the transfer of 

funds to the Commodity Credit Corporation, by reference. 

10. Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account.—The 

bill provides funds to be transferred to the Farm Service Agency 

and to the FPAC Business Center and for certain funds to be transferred within the account. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
93 

11. Commodity Credit Corporation.—The bill includes language 

allowing certain funds to be transferred to the Foreign Agricultural 

Service for information resource management activities. 

12. Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account, Intermediary Relending Program Fund Account, and Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Program Account.—The bill provides 

funds in this account shall be transferred to the Rural Development Salaries and Expenses account. 

13. Child Nutrition Programs.—The bill includes authority to 

transfer section 32 funds to these programs. 

14. Foreign Agricultural Service, Salaries and Expenses.—The 

bill allows for the transfer of funds from the Commodity Credit 

Corporation Export Loan Program Account. 

15. Food for Peace Title I Direct Credit and Food for Progress 

Program Account.—The bill allows funds to be transferred to the 

Farm Service Agency, Salaries and Expenses account. 

16. Commodity Credit Corporation Export Loans Program.—The 

bill provides for transfer of funds to the Foreign Agricultural Service and to the Farm Service Agency for overhead expenses associated with credit reform. 

17. Food and Drug Administration, Salaries and Expenses.—The 

bill allows funds to be transferred among certain activities. 

18. Food and Drug Administration, FDA Innovation Account, 

Cures Act.—The bill allows funds to be transferred from the 21st 

Century Cures Act to the Food and Drug Administration, Salaries 

and Expenses account. 

19. Commodity Futures Trading Commission.—The bill allows 

certain funds to be transferred to a no-year account in the Treasury. 

20. General Provisions.—Section 702 of the bill allows unobligated balances of discretionary funds to be transferred to the 

Working Capital Fund. Section 767 of the bill allows funding transfers to USDA for certain research programs. 

RESCISSIONS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following lists the rescissions of unexpended 

balances included in the accompanying bill: 

Program or activity Amount 

USDA FNS (prior year balances) .................................................................................................................... $800,000,000 

USDA NIFA (prior year balances) ................................................................................................................... 5,830,000 

DISCLOSURE OF EARMARKS AND CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED

SPENDING ITEMS

Neither the bill nor this report contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 

clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CL. 3(e) (RAMSEYER RULE) 

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

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
94 

ted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italics, 

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

RICHARD B. RUSSELL NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH ACT 

* * * * * * * 

NUTRITIONAL AND OTHER PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

SEC. 9. (a)(1)(A) Lunches served by schools participating in the 

school lunch program under this Act shall meet minimum nutritional requirements prescribed by the Secretary on the basis of 

tested nutritional research, except that the minimum nutritional 

requirements— 

(i) shall not be construed to prohibit the substitution of foods 

to accommodate the medical or other special dietary needs of 

individual students; and 

(ii) shall, at a minimum, be based on the weekly average of 

the nutrient content of school lunches. 

(B) The Secretary shall provide technical assistance and training, 

including technical assistance and training in the preparation of 

lower-fat versions of foods commonly used in the school lunch program under this Act, to schools participating in the school lunch 

program to assist the schools in complying with the nutritional requirements prescribed by the Secretary pursuant to subparagraph 

(A) and in providing appropriate meals to children with medically 

certified special dietary needs. The Secretary shall provide additional technical assistance to schools that are having difficulty 

maintaining compliance with the requirements. 

(2) FLUID MILK.— (A) IN GENERAL.—Lunches served by schools participating in the school lunch program under this Act— 

(i) shall offer students a variety of fluid milk. Such 

milk shall be consistent with the most recent Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans published under section 301 

of the National Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5341); 

(ii) may offer students flavored and unflavored fluid 

milk and lactose-free fluid milk; and 

(iii) shall provide a substitute for fluid milk for students whose disability restricts their diet, on receipt of 

a written statement from a licensed physician that 

identifies the disability that restricts the student’s diet 

and that specifies the substitute for fluid milk. 

(B) SUBSTITUTES.— 

(i) STANDARDS FOR SUBSTITUTION.—A school may 

substitute for the fluid milk provided under subparagraph (A), a nondairy beverage that is nutritionally 

equivalent to fluid milk and meets nutritional standards established by the Secretary (which shall, among 

other requirements to be determined by the Secretary, 

include fortification of calcium, protein, vitamin A, and 

vitamin D to levels found in cow’s milk) for students 

who cannot consume fluid milk because of a medical 

or other special dietary need other than a disability 

described in subparagraph (A)(iii). 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
95 

(ii) NOTICE.—The substitutions may be made if the 

school notifies the State agency that the school is implementing a variation allowed under this subparagraph, and if the substitution is requested by written 

statement of a medical authority or by a student’s parent or legal guardian that identifies the medical or 

other special dietary need that restricts the student’s 

diet, except that the school shall not be required to 

provide beverages other than beverages the school has 

identified as acceptable substitutes. 

(iii) EXCESS EXPENSES BORNE BY SCHOOL FOOD AU- THORITY.—Expenses incurred in providing substitutions under this subparagraph that are in excess of 

expenses covered by reimbursements under this Act 

shall be paid by the school food authority. 

(C) RESTRICTIONS ON SALE OF MILK PROHIBITED.—A 

school that participates in the school lunch program under 

this Act shall not directly or indirectly restrict the sale or 

marketing of fluid milk products by the school (or by a person approved by the school) at any time or any place— 

(i) on the school premises; or 

(ii) at any school-sponsored event. 

(3) Students in senior high schools that participate in the school 

lunch program under this Act (and, when approved by the local 

school district or nonprofit private schools, students in any other 

grade level) shall not be required to accept offered foods they do not 

intend to consume, and any such failure to accept offered foods 

shall not affect the full charge to the student for a lunch meeting 

the requirements of this subsection or the amount of payments 

made under this Act to any such school for such lunch. 

(4) PROVISION OF INFORMATION.— (A) GUIDANCE.—Prior to the beginning of the school year 

beginning July 2004, the Secretary shall issue guidance to 

States and school food authorities to increase the consumption of foods and food ingredients that are recommended 

for increased serving consumption in the most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans published under section 301 

of the National Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research 

Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5341). 

(B) RULES.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary shall promulgate 

rules, based on the most recent Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans, that reflect specific recommendations, expressed in serving recommendations, for increased consumption of foods and food ingredients offered in school 

nutrition programs under this Act and the Child Nutrition 

Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.). 

(C) PROCUREMENT AND PROCESSING OF FOOD SERVICE

PRODUCTS AND COMMODITIES.—The Secretary shall— 

(i) identify, develop, and disseminate to State departments of agriculture and education, school food 

authorities, local educational agencies, and local processing entities, model product specifications and practices for foods offered in school nutrition programs 

under this Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
96 

U.S.C. 1771 et seq.) to ensure that the foods reflect the 

most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans published under section 301 of the National Nutrition 

Monitoring and Related Research Act of 1990 (7 

U.S.C. 5341); 

(ii) not later than 1 year after the date of enactment 

of this subparagraph— 

(I) carry out a study to analyze the quantity and 

quality of nutritional information available to 

school food authorities about food service products 

and commodities; and 

(II) submit to Congress a report on the results 

of the study that contains such legislative recommendations as the Secretary considers necessary to ensure that school food authorities have 

access to the nutritional information needed for 

menu planning and compliance assessments; and 

(iii) to the maximum extent practicable, in purchasing and processing commodities for use in school 

nutrition programs under this Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), purchase 

the widest variety of healthful foods that reflect the 

most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 

(5) WATER.—Schools participating in the school lunch program under this Act shall make available to children free of 

charge, as nutritionally appropriate, potable water for consumption in the place where meals are served during meal 

service. 

(b)(1)(A) Not later than June 1 of each fiscal year, the Secretary 

shall prescribe income guidelines for determining eligibility for free 

and reduced price lunches during the 12-month period beginning 

July 1 of such fiscal year and ending June 30 of the following fiscal 

year. The income guidelines for determining eligibility for free 

lunches shall be 130 percent of the applicable family size income 

levels contained in the nonfarm income poverty guidelines prescribed by the Office of Management and Budget, as adjusted annually in accordance with subparagraph (B). The income guidelines 

for determining eligibility for reduced price lunches for any school 

year shall be 185 percent of the applicable family size income levels 

contained in the nonfarm income poverty guidelines prescribed by 

the Office of Management and Budget, as adjusted annually in accordance with subparagraph (B). The Office of Management and 

Budget guidelines shall be revised at annual intervals, or at any 

shorter interval deemed feasible and desirable. 

(B) The revision required by subparagraph (A) of this paragraph 

shall be made by multiplying— 

(i) the official poverty line (as defined by the Office of Management and Budget); by 

(ii) the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index during the annual or other interval immediately preceding the 

time at which the adjustment is made. 

Revisions under this subparagraph shall be made not more than 30 

days after the date on which the consumer price index data required to compute the adjustment becomes available. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
97 

(2)(A) Following the determination by the Secretary under paragraph (1) of this subsection of the income eligibility guidelines for 

each school year, each State educational agency shall announce the 

income eligibility guidelines, by family size, to be used by schools 

in the State in making determinations of eligibility for free and reduced price lunches. Local school authorities shall, each year, publicly announce the income eligibility guidelines for free and reduced 

price lunches on or before the opening of school. 

(B) APPLICATIONS AND DESCRIPTIVE MATERIAL.— (i) IN GENERAL.—Applications for free and reduced price 

lunches, in such form as the Secretary may prescribe or 

approve, and any descriptive material, shall be distributed 

to the parents or guardians of children in attendance at 

the school, and shall contain only the family size income 

levels for reduced price meal eligibility with the explanation that households with incomes less than or equal to 

these values would be eligible for free or reduced price 

lunches. 

(ii) INCOME ELIGIBILITY GUIDELINES.—Forms and descriptive material distributed in accordance with clause (i) 

may not contain the income eligibility guidelines for free 

lunches. 

(iii) CONTENTS OF DESCRIPTIVE MATERIAL.— (I) IN GENERAL.—Descriptive material distributed in 

accordance with clause (i) shall contain a notification 

that— 

(aa) participants in the programs listed in subclause (II) may be eligible for free or reduced price 

meals; and 

(bb) documentation may be requested for 

verification of eligibility for free or reduced price 

meals. 

(II) PROGRAMS.—The programs referred to in subclause (I)(aa) are— 

(aa) the special supplemental nutrition program 

for women, infants, and children established by 

section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 

U.S.C. 1786); 

(bb) the supplemental nutrition assistance program established under the Food and Nutrition 

Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.); 

(cc) the food distribution program on Indian reservations established under section 4(b) of the 

Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2013(b)); 

and 

(dd) a State program funded under the program 

of block grants to States for temporary assistance 

for needy families established under part A of title 

IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et 

seq.). 

(3) HOUSEHOLD APPLICATIONS.— 

(A) DEFINITION OF HOUSEHOLD APPLICATION.—In this 

paragraph, the term ‘‘household application’’ means an application for a child of a household to receive free or reduced price school lunches under this Act, or free or reVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
98 

duced price school breakfasts under the Child Nutrition 

Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), for which an eligibility determination is made other than under paragraph 

(4) or (5). 

(B) ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION.— 

(i) IN GENERAL.—An eligibility determination shall 

be made on the basis of a complete household application executed by an adult member of the household or 

in accordance with guidance issued by the Secretary. 

(ii) ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES AND APPLICATIONS.—A 

household application may be executed using an electronic signature if— 

(I) the application is submitted electronically; 

and 

(II) the electronic application filing system 

meets confidentiality standards established by the 

Secretary. 

(C) CHILDREN IN HOUSEHOLD.— 

(i) IN GENERAL.—The household application shall 

identify the names of each child in the household for 

whom meal benefits are requested. 

(ii) SEPARATE APPLICATIONS.—A State educational 

agency or local educational agency may not request a 

separate application for each child in the household 

that attends schools under the same local educational 

agency. 

(D) VERIFICATION OF SAMPLE.— 

(i) DEFINITIONS.—In this subparagraph: 

(I) ERROR PRONE APPLICATION.—The term ‘‘error 

prone application’’ means an approved household 

application that— 

(aa) indicates monthly income that is within 

$100, or an annual income that is within 

$1,200, of the income eligibility limitation for 

free or reduced price meals; or 

(bb) in lieu of the criteria established under 

item (aa), meets criteria established by the 

Secretary. 

(II) NON-RESPONSE RATE.—The term ‘‘non-response rate’’ means (in accordance with guidelines 

established by the Secretary) the percentage of approved household applications for which 

verification information has not been obtained by 

a local educational agency after attempted 

verification under subparagraphs (F) and (G). 

(ii) VERIFICATION OF SAMPLE.—Each school year, a 

local educational agency shall verify eligibility of the 

children in a sample of household applications approved for the school year by the local educational 

agency, as determined by the Secretary in accordance 

with this subsection. 

(iii) SAMPLE SIZE.—Except as otherwise provided in 

this paragraph, the sample for a local educational 

agency for a school year shall equal the lesser of— 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
99 

(I) 3 percent of all applications approved by the 

local educational agency for the school year, as of 

October 1 of the school year, selected from error 

prone applications; or 

(II) 3,000 error prone applications approved by 

the local educational agency for the school year, as 

of October 1 of the school year. 

(iv) ALTERNATIVE SAMPLE SIZE.— (I) IN GENERAL.—If the conditions described in 

subclause (IV) are met, the verification sample 

size for a local educational agency shall be the 

sample size described in subclause (II) or (III), as 

determined by the local educational agency. 

(II) 3,000/3 PERCENT OPTION.—The sample size 

described in this subclause shall be the lesser of 

3,000, or 3 percent of, applications selected at random from applications approved by the local educational agency for the school year, as of October 

1 of the school year. 

(III) 1,000/1 PERCENT PLUS OPTION.— (aa) IN GENERAL.—The sample size described in this subclause shall be the sum of— 

(AA) the lesser of 1,000, or 1 percent of, 

all applications approved by the local educational agency for the school year, as of 

October 1 of the school year, selected 

from error prone applications; and 

(BB) the lesser of 500, or 1⁄2 of 1 percent of, applications approved by the local 

educational agency for the school year, as 

of October 1 of the school year, that provide a case number (in lieu of income information) showing participation in a program described in item (bb) selected from 

those approved applications that provide 

a case number (in lieu of income information) verifying the participation. 

(bb) PROGRAMS.—The programs described in 

this item are— 

(AA) the supplemental nutrition assistance program established under the Food 

and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 

et seq.); 

(BB) the food distribution program on 

Indian reservations established under 

section 4(b) of the Food and Nutrition Act 

of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2013(b)); and 

(CC) a State program funded under the 

program of block grants to States for temporary assistance for needy families established under part A of title IV of the 

Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) 

that the Secretary determines complies 

with standards established by the Secretary that ensure that the standards 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
100 

under the State program are comparable 

to or more restrictive than those in effect 

on June 1, 1995. 

(IV) CONDITIONS.—The conditions referred to in 

subclause (I) shall be met for a local educational 

agency for a school year if— 

(aa) the nonresponse rate for the local educational agency for the preceding school year 

is less than 20 percent; or 

(bb) the local educational agency has more 

than 20,000 children approved by application 

by the local educational agency as eligible for 

free or reduced price meals for the school 

year, as of October 1 of the school year, and— 

(AA) the nonresponse rate for the preceding school year is at least 10 percent 

below the nonresponse rate for the second 

preceding school year; or 

(BB) in the case of the school year beginning July 2005, the local educational 

agency attempts to verify all approved 

household applications selected for 

verification through use of public agency 

records from at least 2 of the programs or 

sources of information described in subparagraph (F)(i). 

(v) ADDITIONAL SELECTED APPLICATIONS.—A sample 

for a local educational agency for a school year under 

clauses (iii) and (iv)(III)(AA) shall include the number 

of additional randomly selected approved household 

applications that are required to comply with the sample size requirements in those clauses. 

(E) PRELIMINARY REVIEW.— (i) REVIEW FOR ACCURACY.— 

(I) IN GENERAL.—Prior to conducting any other 

verification activity for approved household applications selected for verification, the local educational agency shall ensure that the initial eligibility determination for each approved household 

application is reviewed for accuracy by an individual other than the individual making the initial eligibility determination, unless otherwise determined by the Secretary. 

(II) WAIVER.—The requirements of subclause (I) 

shall be waived for a local educational agency if 

the local educational agency is using a technologybased solution that demonstrates a high level of 

accuracy, to the satisfaction of the Secretary, in 

processing an initial eligibility determination in 

accordance with the income eligibility guidelines 

of the school lunch program. 

(ii) CORRECT ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION.—If the review indicates that the initial eligibility determination 

is correct, the local educational agency shall verify the 

approved household application. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
101 

(iii) INCORRECT ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION.—If the 

review indicates that the initial eligibility determination is incorrect, the local educational agency shall (as 

determined by the Secretary)— 

(I) correct the eligibility status of the household; 

(II) notify the household of the change; 

(III) in any case in which the review indicates 

that the household is not eligible for free or reduced-price meals, notify the household of the reason for the ineligibility and that the household 

may reapply with income documentation for free 

or reduced-price meals; and 

(IV) in any case in which the review indicates 

that the household is eligible for free or reducedprice meals, verify the approved household application. 

(F) DIRECT VERIFICATION.— (i) IN GENERAL.—Subject to clauses (ii) and (iii), to 

verify eligibility for free or reduced price meals for approved household applications selected for verification, 

the local educational agency may (in accordance with 

criteria established by the Secretary) first obtain and 

use income and program participation information 

from a public agency administering— 

(I) the supplemental nutrition assistance program established under the Food and Nutrition 

Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.); 

(II) the food distribution program on Indian reservations established under section 4(b) of the 

Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2013(b)); 

(III) the temporary assistance for needy families 

program funded under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

(IV) the State medicaid program under title XIX 

of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.); 

or 

(V) a similar income-tested program or other 

source of information, as determined by the Secretary. 

(ii) FREE MEALS.—Public agency records that may be 

obtained and used under clause (i) to verify eligibility 

for free meals for approved household applications selected for verification shall include the most recent 

available information (other than information reflecting program participation or income before the 180- 

day period ending on the date of application for free 

meals) that is relied on to administer— 

(I) a program or source of information described 

in clause (i) (other than clause (i)(IV)); or 

(II) the State plan for medical assistance under 

title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

1396 et seq.) in— 

(aa) a State in which the income eligibility 

limit applied under section 1902(l)(2)(C) of 

that Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(l)(2)(C)) is not more 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
102 

than 133 percent of the official poverty line 

described in section 1902(l)(2)(A) of that Act 

(42 U.S.C. 1396a(l)(2)(A)); or 

(bb) a State that otherwise identifies households that have income that is not more than 

133 percent of the official poverty line described in section 1902(l)(2)(A) of that Act (42 

U.S.C. 1396a(l)(2)(A)). 

(iii) REDUCED PRICE MEALS.—Public agency records 

that may be obtained and used under clause (i) to 

verify eligibility for reduced price meals for approved 

household applications selected for verification shall 

include the most recent available information (other 

than information reflecting program participation or 

income before the 180-day period ending on the date 

of application for reduced price meals) that is relied on 

to administer— 

(I) a program or source of information described 

in clause (i) (other than clause (i)(IV)); or 

(II) the State plan for medical assistance under 

title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

1396 et seq.) in— 

(aa) a State in which the income eligibility 

limit applied under section 1902(l)(2)(C) of 

that Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(l)(2)(C)) is not more 

than 185 percent of the official poverty line 

described in section 1902(l)(2)(A) of that Act 

(42 U.S.C. 1396a(l)(2)(A)); or 

(bb) a State that otherwise identifies households that have income that is not more than 

185 percent of the official poverty line described in section 1902(l)(2)(A) of that Act (42 

U.S.C. 1396a(l)(2)(A)). 

(iv) EVALUATION.—Not later than 3 years after the 

date of enactment of this subparagraph, the Secretary 

shall complete an evaluation of— 

(I) the effectiveness of direct verification carried 

out under this subparagraph in decreasing the 

portion of the verification sample that must be 

verified under subparagraph (G) while ensuring 

that adequate verification information is obtained; 

and 

(II) the feasibility of direct verification by State 

agencies and local educational agencies. 

(v) EXPANDED USE OF DIRECT VERIFICATION.—If the 

Secretary determines that direct verification significantly decreases the portion of the verification sample 

that must be verified under subparagraph (G), while 

ensuring that adequate verification information is obtained, and can be conducted by most State agencies 

and local educational agencies, the Secretary may require a State agency or local educational agency to implement direct verification through 1 or more of the 

programs described in clause (i), as determined by the 

Secretary, unless the State agency or local educational 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
103 

agency demonstrates (under criteria established by the 

Secretary) that the State agency or local educational 

agency lacks the capacity to conduct, or is unable to 

implement, direct verification. 

(G) HOUSEHOLD VERIFICATION.— (i) IN GENERAL.—If an approved household application is not verified through the use of public agency 

records, a local educational agency shall provide to the 

household written notice that— 

(I) the approved household application has been 

selected for verification; and 

(II) the household is required to submit 

verification information to confirm eligibility for 

free or reduced price meals. 

(ii) PHONE NUMBER.—The written notice in clause (i) 

shall include a toll-free phone number that parents 

and legal guardians in households selected for 

verification can call for assistance with the verification 

process. 

(iii) FOLLOWUP ACTIVITIES.—If a household does not 

respond to a verification request, a local educational 

agency shall make at least 1 attempt to obtain the 

necessary verification from the household in accordance with guidelines and regulations promulgated by 

the Secretary. 

(iv) CONTRACT AUTHORITY FOR SCHOOL FOOD AU- THORITIES.—A local educational agency may contract 

(under standards established by the Secretary) with a 

third party to assist the local educational agency in 

carrying out clause (iii). 

(H) VERIFICATION DEADLINE.— (i) GENERAL DEADLINE.— 

(I) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subclause (II), not 

later than November 15 of each school year, a 

local educational agency shall complete the 

verification activities required for the school year 

(including followup activities). 

(II) EXTENSION.—Under criteria established by 

the Secretary, a State may extend the deadline established under subclause (I) for a school year for 

a local educational agency to December 15 of the 

school year. 

(ii) ELIGIBILITY CHANGES.—Based on the verification 

activities, the local educational agency shall make appropriate modifications to the eligibility determinations made for household applications in accordance 

with criteria established by the Secretary. 

(I) LOCAL CONDITIONS.—In the case of a natural disaster, 

civil disorder, strike, or other local condition (as determined by the Secretary), the Secretary may substitute alternatives for— 

(i) the sample size and sample selection criteria established under subparagraph (D); and 

(ii) the verification deadline established under subparagraph (H). 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
104 

(J) INDIVIDUAL REVIEW.—In accordance with criteria established by the Secretary, the local educational agency 

may, on individual review— 

(i) decline to verify no more than 5 percent of approved household applications selected under subparagraph (D); and 

(ii) replace the approved household applications with 

other approved household applications to be verified. 

(K) FEASIBILITY STUDY.— 

(i) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a 

study of the feasibility of using computer technology 

(including data mining) to reduce— 

(I) overcertification errors in the school lunch 

program under this Act; 

(II) waste, fraud, and abuse in connection with 

this paragraph; and 

(III) errors, waste, fraud, and abuse in other nutrition programs, as determined to be appropriate 

by the Secretary. 

(ii) REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the date 

of enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary shall 

submit to the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the 

Senate a report describing— 

(I) the results of the feasibility study conducted 

under this subsection; 

(II) how a computer system using technology described in clause (i) could be implemented; 

(III) a plan for implementation; and 

(IV) proposed legislation, if necessary, to implement the system. 

(4) DIRECT CERTIFICATION FOR CHILDREN IN SUPPLEMENTAL

NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM HOUSEHOLDS.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraph (D), each 

State agency shall enter into an agreement with the State 

agency conducting eligibility determinations for the supplemental nutrition assistance program established under 

the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.). 

(B) PROCEDURES.—Subject to paragraph (6), the agreement shall establish procedures under which a child who 

is a member of a household receiving assistance under the 

supplemental nutrition assistance program shall be certified as eligible for free lunches under this Act and free 

breakfasts under the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 

U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), without further application. 

(C) CERTIFICATION.—Subject to paragraph (6), under the 

agreement, the local educational agency conducting eligibility determinations for a school lunch program under 

this Act and a school breakfast program under the Child 

Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.) shall certify 

a child who is a member of a household receiving assistance under the supplemental nutrition assistance program 

as eligible for free lunches under this Act and free breakVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
105 

fasts under the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 

1771 et seq.), without further application. 

(D) APPLICABILITY.—This paragraph applies to— 

(i) in the case of the school year beginning July 

2006, a school district that had an enrollment of 

25,000 students or more in the preceding school year; 

(ii) in the case of the school year beginning July 

2007, a school district that had an enrollment of 

10,000 students or more in the preceding school year; 

and 

(iii) in the case of the school year beginning July 

2008 and each subsequent school year, each local educational agency. 

(E) PERFORMANCE AWARDS.— (i) IN GENERAL.—Effective for each of the school 

years beginning July 1, 2011, July 1, 2012, and July 

1, 2013, the Secretary shall offer performance awards 

to States to encourage the States to ensure that all 

children eligible for direct certification under this 

paragraph are certified in accordance with this paragraph. 

(ii) REQUIREMENTS.—For each school year described 

in clause (i), the Secretary shall— 

(I) consider State data from the prior school 

year, including estimates contained in the report 

required under section 4301 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (42 U.S.C. 

1758a); and 

(II) make performance awards to not more than 

15 States that demonstrate, as determined by the 

Secretary— 

(aa) outstanding performance; and 

(bb) substantial improvement. 

(iii) USE OF FUNDS.—A State agency that receives a 

performance award under clause (i)— 

(I) shall treat the funds as program income; and 

(II) may transfer the funds to school food authorities for use in carrying out the program. 

(iv) FUNDING.— (I) IN GENERAL.—On October 1, 2011, and each 

subsequent October 1 through October 1, 2013, 

out of any funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the Secretary of the Treasury shall 

transfer to the Secretary— 

(aa) $2,000,000 to carry out clause 

(ii)(II)(aa); and 

(bb) $2,000,000 to carry out clause 

(ii)(II)(bb). 

(II) RECEIPT AND ACCEPTANCE.—The Secretary 

shall be entitled to receive, shall accept, and shall 

use to carry out this clause the funds transferred 

under subclause (I), without further appropriation. 

(v) PAYMENTS NOT SUBJECT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW.—A 

determination by the Secretary whether, and in what 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
106 

amount, to make a performance award under this subparagraph shall not be subject to administrative or judicial review. 

(F) CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PLANS.— (i) DEFINITION OF REQUIRED PERCENTAGE.—In this 

subparagraph, the term ‘‘required percentage’’ 

means— 

(I) for the school year beginning July 1, 2011, 80 

percent; 

(II) for the school year beginning July 1, 2012, 

90 percent; and 

(III) for the school year beginning July 1, 2013, 

and each school year thereafter, 95 percent. 

(ii) REQUIREMENTS.—Each school year, the Secretary 

shall— 

(I) identify, using data from the prior year, including estimates contained in the report required 

under section 4301 of the Food, Conservation, and 

Energy Act of 2008 (42 U.S.C. 1758a), States that 

directly certify less than the required percentage 

of the total number of children in the State who 

are eligible for direct certification under this paragraph; 

(II) require the States identified under subclause (I) to implement a continuous improvement 

plan to fully meet the requirements of this paragraph, which shall include a plan to improve direct certification for the following school year; and 

(III) assist the States identified under subclause 

(I) to develop and implement a continuous improvement plan in accordance with subclause (II). 

(iii) FAILURE TO MEET PERFORMANCE STANDARD.— 

(I) IN GENERAL.—A State that is required to develop and implement a continuous improvement 

plan under clause (ii)(II) shall be required to submit the continuous improvement plan to the Secretary, for the approval of the Secretary. 

(II) REQUIREMENTS.—At a minimum, a continuous improvement plan under subclause (I) shall 

include— 

(aa) specific measures that the State will 

use to identify more children who are eligible 

for direct certification, including improvements or modifications to technology, information systems, or databases; 

(bb) a timeline for the State to implement 

those measures; and 

(cc) goals for the State to improve direct 

certification results. 

(G) WITHOUT FURTHER APPLICATION.— (i) IN GENERAL.—In this paragraph, the term ‘‘without further application’’ means that no action is required by the household of the child. 

(ii) CLARIFICATION.—A requirement that a household 

return a letter notifying the household of eligibility for 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
107 

direct certification or eligibility for free school meals 

does not meet the requirements of clause (i). 

(5) DISCRETIONARY CERTIFICATION.—Subject to paragraph (6), 

any local educational agency may certify any child as eligible 

for free lunches or breakfasts, without further application, by 

directly communicating with the appropriate State or local 

agency to obtain documentation of the status of the child as— 

(A) a member of a family that is receiving assistance 

under the temporary assistance for needy families program 

funded under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act 

(42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) that the Secretary determines complies with standards established by the Secretary that ensure that the standards under the State program are comparable to or more restrictive than those in effect on June 

1, 1995; 

(B) a homeless child or youth (defined as 1 of the individuals described in section 725(2) of the McKinney-Vento 

Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11434a(2)); 

(C) served by the runaway and homeless youth grant 

program established under the Runaway and Homeless 

Youth Act (42 U.S.C. 5701 et seq.); 

(D) a migratory child (as defined in section 1309 of the 

Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 

U.S.C. 6399)); or 

(E)(i) a foster child whose care and placement is the responsibility of an agency that administers a State plan 

under part B or E of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 

U.S.C. 621 et seq.); or 

(ii) a foster child who a court has placed with a caretaker household. 

(6) USE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—The use or disclosure of any information obtained from an application for free or reduced price 

meals, or from a State or local agency referred to in paragraph (3)(F), (4), or (5), shall be limited to— 

(i) a person directly connected with the administration or enforcement of this Act or the Child Nutrition 

Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.) (including a regulation promulgated under either Act); 

(ii) a person directly connected with the administration or enforcement of— 

(I) a Federal education program; 

(II) a State health or education program administered by the State or local educational agency 

(other than a program carried out under title XIX 

or XXI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 

et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 1397aa et seq.)); or 

(III) a Federal, State, or local means-tested nutrition program with eligibility standards comparable to the school lunch program under this 

Act; 

(iii)(I) the Comptroller General of the United States 

for audit and examination authorized by any other 

provision of law; and 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
108 

(II) notwithstanding any other provision of law, a 

Federal, State, or local law enforcement official for the 

purpose of investigating an alleged violation of any 

program covered by this paragraph or paragraph 

(3)(F), (4), or (5); 

(iv) a person directly connected with the administration of the State medicaid program under title XIX of 

the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) or the 

State children’s health insurance program under title 

XXI of that Act (42 U.S.C. 1397aa et seq.) solely for 

the purposes of— 

(I) identifying children eligible for benefits 

under, and enrolling children in, those programs, 

except that this subclause shall apply only to the 

extent that the State and the local educational 

agency or school food authority so elect; and 

(II) verifying the eligibility of children for programs under this Act or the Child Nutrition Act 

of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.); and 

(v) a third party contractor described in paragraph 

(3)(G)(iv). 

(B) LIMITATION ON INFORMATION PROVIDED.—Information 

provided under clause (ii) or (v) of subparagraph (A) shall 

be limited to the income eligibility status of the child for 

whom application for free or reduced price meal benefits is 

made or for whom eligibility information is provided under 

paragraph (3)(F), (4), or (5), unless the consent of the parent or guardian of the child for whom application for benefits was made is obtained. 

(C) CRIMINAL PENALTY.—A person described in subparagraph (A) who publishes, divulges, discloses, or makes 

known in any manner, or to any extent not authorized by 

Federal law (including a regulation), any information obtained under this subsection shall be fined not more than 

$1,000 or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both. 

(D) REQUIREMENTS FOR WAIVER OF CONFIDENTIALITY.—A 

State that elects to exercise the option described in subparagraph (A)(iv)(I) shall ensure that any local educational 

agency or school food authority acting in accordance with 

that option— 

(i) has a written agreement with 1 or more State or 

local agencies administering health programs for children under titles XIX and XXI of the Social Security 

Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq. and 1397aa et seq.) that 

requires the health agencies to use the information obtained under subparagraph (A) to seek to enroll children in those health programs; and 

(ii)(I) notifies each household, the information of 

which shall be disclosed under subparagraph (A), that 

the information disclosed will be used only to enroll 

children in health programs referred to in subparagraph (A)(iv); and 

(II) provides each parent or guardian of a child in 

the household with an opportunity to elect not to have 

the information disclosed. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
109 

(E) USE OF DISCLOSED INFORMATION.—A person to which 

information is disclosed under subparagraph (A)(iv)(I) 

shall use or disclose the information only as necessary for 

the purpose of enrolling children in health programs referred to in subparagraph (A)(iv). 

(7) FREE AND REDUCED PRICE POLICY STATEMENT.— (A) IN GENERAL.—After the initial submission, a local 

educational agency shall not be required to submit a free 

and reduced price policy statement to a State educational 

agency under this Act unless there is a substantive change 

in the free and reduced price policy of the local educational 

agency. 

(B) ROUTINE CHANGE.—A routine change in the policy of 

a local educational agency (such as an annual adjustment 

of the income eligibility guidelines for free and reduced 

price meals) shall not be sufficient cause for requiring the 

local educational agency to submit a policy statement. 

(8) COMMUNICATIONS.— (A) IN GENERAL.—Any communication with a household 

under this subsection or subsection (d) shall be in an understandable and uniform format and, to the maximum extent practicable, in a language that parents and legal 

guardians can understand. 

(B) ELECTRONIC AVAILABILITY.—In addition to the distribution of applications and descriptive material in paper 

form as provided for in this paragraph, the applications 

and material may be made available electronically via the 

Internet. 

(9) ELIGIBILITY FOR FREE AND REDUCED PRICE LUNCHES.— (A) FREE LUNCHES.—Any child who is a member of a 

household whose income, at the time the application is 

submitted, is at an annual rate which does not exceed the 

applicable family size income level of the income eligibility 

guidelines for free lunches, as determined under paragraph (1), shall be served a free lunch. 

(B) REDUCED PRICE LUNCHES.— (i) IN GENERAL.—Any child who is a member of a 

household whose income, at the time the application is 

submitted, is at an annual rate greater than the applicable family size income level of the income eligibility 

guidelines for free lunches, as determined under paragraph (1), but less than or equal to the applicable family size income level of the income eligibility guidelines 

for reduced price lunches, as determined under paragraph (1), shall be served a reduced price lunch. 

(ii) MAXIMUM PRICE.—The price charged for a reduced price lunch shall not exceed 40 cents. 

(C) DURATION.—Except as otherwise specified in paragraph (3)(E), (3)(H)(ii), and section 11(a), eligibility for free 

or reduced price meals for any school year shall remain in 

effect— 

(i) beginning on the date of eligibility approval for 

the current school year; and 

(ii) ending on a date during the subsequent school 

year determined by the Secretary. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
110 

(10) No physical segregation of or other discrimination against 

any child eligible for a free lunch or a reduced price lunch under 

this subsection shall be made by the school nor shall there be any 

overt identification of any child by special tokens or tickets, announced or published list of names, or by other means. 

(11) Any child who has a parent or guardian who (A) is responsible for the principal support of such child and (B) is unemployed 

shall be served a free or reduced price lunch, respectively, during 

any period (i) in which such child’s parent or guardian continues 

to be unemployed and (ii) the income of the child’s parents or 

guardians during such period of unemployment falls within the income eligibility criteria for free lunches or reduced price lunches, 

respectively, based on the current rate of income of such parents 

or guardians. Local educational agencies shall publicly announce 

that such children are eligible for free or reduced price lunch, and 

shall make determinations with respect to the status of any parent 

or guardian of any child under clauses (A) and (B) of the preceding 

sentence on the basis of a statement executed in such form as the 

Secretary may prescribe by such parent or guardian. No physical 

segregation of, or other discrimination against, any child eligible 

for a free or reduced price lunch under this paragraph shall be 

made by the school nor shall there be any overt identification of 

any such child by special tokens or tickets, announced or published 

lists of names, or by any other means. 

(12)(A) A child shall be considered automatically eligible for a 

free lunch and breakfast under this Act and the Child Nutrition 

Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), respectively, without further 

application or eligibility determination, if the child is— 

(i) a member of a household receiving assistance under the 

supplemental nutrition assistance program authorized under 

the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.); 

(ii) a member of a family (under the State program funded 

under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

601 et seq.)) that the Secretary determines complies with 

standards established by the Secretary that ensure that the 

standards under the State program are comparable to or more 

restrictive than those in effect on June 1, 1995; 

(iii) enrolled as a participant in a Head Start program authorized under the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.), on 

the basis of a determination that the child meets the eligibility 

criteria prescribed under section 645(a)(1)(B) of the Head Start 

Act (42 U.S.C. 9840(a)(1)(B)); 

(iv) a homeless child or youth (defined as 1 of the individuals described in section 725(2) of the McKinney-Vento 

Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11434a(2))); 

(v) served by the runaway and homeless youth grant 

program established under the Runaway and Homeless 

Youth Act (42 U.S.C. 5701 et seq.); 

(vi) a migratory child (as defined in section 1309 of the 

Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 

U.S.C. 6399)); or 

(vii)(I) a foster child whose care and placement is the responsibility of an agency that administers a State plan 

under part B or E of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 

U.S.C. 621 et seq.); or 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
111 

(II) a foster child who a court has placed with a 

caretaker household. 

(B) Proof of receipt of supplemental nutrition assistance program 

benefits or assistance under the State program funded under part 

A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) that 

the Secretary determines complies with standards established by 

the Secretary that ensure that the standards under the State program are comparable to or more restrictive than those in effect on 

June 1, 1995, or of enrollment or participation in a Head Start program on the basis described in subparagraph (A)(iii), shall be sufficient to satisfy any verification requirement imposed under this 

subsection. 

(13) EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN MILITARY HOUSING ALLOWANCES.—The amount of a basic allowance provided under section 403 of title 37, United States Code, on behalf of a member 

of a uniformed service for housing that is acquired or constructed under subchapter IV of chapter 169 of title 10, United 

States Code, or any related provision of law, shall not be considered to be income for the purpose of determining the eligibility of a child who is a member of the household of the member of a uniformed service for free or reduced price lunches 

under this Act. 

(14) COMBAT PAY.— 

(A) DEFINITION OF COMBAT PAY.—In this paragraph, the 

term ‘‘combat pay’’ means any additional payment under 

chapter 5 of title 37, United States Code, or otherwise designated by the Secretary to be appropriate for exclusion 

under this paragraph, that is received by or from a member of the United States Armed Forces deployed to a designated combat zone, if the additional pay— 

(i) is the result of deployment to or service in a combat zone; and 

(ii) was not received immediately prior to serving in 

a combat zone. 

(B) EXCLUSION.—Combat pay shall not be considered to 

be income for the purpose of determining the eligibility for 

free or reduced price meals of a child who is a member of 

the household of a member of the United States Armed 

Forces. 

(15) DIRECT CERTIFICATION FOR CHILDREN RECEIVING MEDICAID BENEFITS.— 

(A) DEFINITIONS.—In this paragraph: 

(i) ELIGIBLE CHILD.—The term ‘‘eligible child’’ means 

a child— 

(I)(aa) who is eligible for and receiving medical 

assistance under the Medicaid program; and 

(bb) who is a member of a family with an income as measured by the Medicaid program before 

the application of any expense, block, or other income disregard, that does not exceed 133 percent 

of the poverty line (as defined in section 673(2) of 

the Community Services Block Grant Act (42 

U.S.C. 9902(2), including any revision required by 

such section)) applicable to a family of the size 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
112 

used for purposes of determining eligibility for the 

Medicaid program; or 

(II) who is a member of a household (as that 

term is defined in section 245.2 of title 7, Code of 

Federal Regulations (or successor regulations) 

with a child described in subclause (I). 

(ii) MEDICAID PROGRAM.—The term ‘‘Medicaid program’’ means the program of medical assistance established under title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 

U.S.C. 1396 et seq.). 

(B) DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.— 

(i) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, acting through the 

Administrator of the Food and Nutrition Service and 

in cooperation with selected State agencies, shall conduct a demonstration project in selected local educational agencies to determine whether direct certification of eligible children is an effective method of certifying children for free lunches and breakfasts under 

section 9(b)(1)(A) of this Act and section 4(e)(1)(A) of 

the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 

1773(e)(1)(A)). 

(ii) SCOPE OF PROJECT.—The Secretary shall carry 

out the demonstration project under this subparagraph— 

(I) for the school year beginning July 1, 2012, in 

selected local educational agencies that collectively serve 2.5 percent of students certified for 

free and reduced price meals nationwide, based on 

the most recent available data; 

(II) for the school year beginning July 1, 2013, 

in selected local educational agencies that collectively serve 5 percent of students certified for free 

and reduced price meals nationwide, based on the 

most recent available data; and 

(III) for the school year beginning July 1, 2014, 

and each subsequent school year, in selected local 

educational agencies that collectively serve 10 percent of students certified for free and reduced 

price meals nationwide, based on the most recent 

available data. 

(iii) PURPOSES OF THE PROJECT.—At a minimum, the 

purposes of the demonstration project shall be— 

(I) to determine the potential of direct certification with the Medicaid program to reach children who are eligible for free meals but not certified to receive the meals; 

(II) to determine the potential of direct certification with the Medicaid program to directly certify children who are enrolled for free meals based 

on a household application; and 

(III) to provide an estimate of the effect on Federal costs and on participation in the school lunch 

program under this Act and the school breakfast 

program established by section 4 of the Child NuVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:38 Jun 07, 2019 Jkt 036577 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR107.XXX HR107

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
113 

trition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773) of direct certification with the Medicaid program. 

(iv) COST ESTIMATE.—For each of 2 school years of 

the demonstration project, the Secretary shall estimate the cost of the direct certification of eligible children for free school meals through data derived from— 

(I) the school meal programs authorized under 

this Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 

U.S.C. 1771 et seq.); 

(II) the Medicaid program; and 

(III) interviews with a statistically representative sample of households. 

(C) AGREEMENT.— 

(i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than July 1 of the first 

school year during which a State agency will participate in the demonstration project, the State agency 

shall enter into an agreement with the 1 or more State 

agencies conducting eligibility determinations for the 

Medicaid program. 

(ii) WITHOUT FURTHER APPLICATION.—Subject to 

paragraph (6), the agreement described in subparagraph (D) shall establish procedures under which an 

eligible child shall be certified for free lunches under 

this Act and free breakfasts under section 4 of the 

Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773), without 

further application (as defined in paragraph (4)(G)). 

(D) CERTIFICATION.—For the school year beginning on 

July 1, 2012, and each subsequent school year, subject to 

paragraph (6), the local educational agencies participating 

in the demonstration project shall certify an eligible child 

as eligible for free lunches under this Act and free breakfasts under the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 

1771 et seq.), without further application (as defined in 

paragraph (4)(G)). 

(E) SITE SELECTION.— 

(i) IN GENERAL.—To be eligible to participate in the 

demonstration project under this subsection, a State 

agency shall submit to the Secretary an application at 

such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may require. 

(ii) CONSIDERATIONS.—In selecting States and local 

educational agencies for participation in the demonstration project, the Secretary may take into consideration such factors as the Secretary considers to be 

appropriate, which may include— 

(I) the rate of direct certification; 

(II) the share of individuals who are eligible for 

benefits under the supplemental nutrition assistance program established under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) who participate in the program, as determined by the Secretary; 

(III) the income eligibility limit for the Medicaid 

program; 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
114 

(IV) the feasibility of matching data between 

local educational agencies and the Medicaid program; 

(V) the socioeconomic profile of the State or 

local educational agencies; and 

(VI) the willingness of the State and local educational agencies to comply with the requirements 

of the demonstration project. 

(F) ACCESS TO DATA.—For purposes of conducting the 

demonstration project under this paragraph, the Secretary 

shall have access to— 

(i) educational and other records of State and local 

educational and other agencies and institutions receiving funding or providing benefits for 1 or more programs authorized under this Act or the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.); and 

(ii) income and program participation information 

from public agencies administering the Medicaid program. 

(G) REPORT TO CONGRESS.— (i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than October 1, 2014, the 

Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Education 

and Labor of the House of Representatives and the 

Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of 

the Senate, an interim report that describes the results of the demonstration project required under this 

paragraph. 

(ii) FINAL REPORT.—Not later than October 1, 2015, 

the Secretary shall submit a final report to the committees described in clause (i). 

(H) FUNDING.— (i) IN GENERAL.—On October 1, 2010, out of any 

funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the 

Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer to the Secretary to carry out subparagraph (G) $5,000,000, to remain available until expended. 

(ii) RECEIPT AND ACCEPTANCE.—The Secretary shall 

be entitled to receive, shall accept, and shall use to 

carry out subparagraph (G) the funds transferred 

under clause (i), without further appropriation. 

(c) School lunch programs under this Act shall be operated on a 

nonprofit basis. Commodities purchased under the authority of section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935, may be donated by the Secretary to schools, in accordance with the needs as determined by 

local school authorities, for utilization in the school lunch program 

under this Act as well as to other schools carrying out nonprofit 

school lunch programs and institutions authorized to receive such 

commodities. The requirements of this section relating to the service of meals without cost or at a reduced cost shall apply to the 

lunch program of any school utilizing commodities donated under 

any provision of law. 

(d)(1) The Secretary shall require as a condition of eligibility for 

receipt of free or reduced price lunches that the member of the 

household who executes the application furnish the last 4 digits of 

the social security account number of the parent or guardian who 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
115 

is the primary wage earner responsible for the care of the child for 

whom the application is made, or that of another appropriate adult 

member of the child’s household, as determined by the Secretary. 

(2) No member of a household may be provided a free or reduced 

price lunch under this Act unless— 

(A) appropriate documentation relating to the income of such 

household (as prescribed by the Secretary) has been provided 

to the appropriate local educational agency so that the local 

educational agency may calculate the total income of such 

household; 

(B) documentation showing that the household is participating in the supplemental nutrition assistance program under 

the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 has been provided to the 

appropriate local educational agency; 

(C) documentation has been provided to the appropriate local 

educational agency showing that the family is receiving assistance under the State program funded under part A of title IV 

of the Social Security Act that the Secretary determines complies with standards established by the Secretary that ensure 

that the standards under the State program are comparable to 

or more restrictive than those in effect on June 1, 1995; 

(D) documentation has been provided to the appropriate local 

educational agency showing that the child meets the criteria 

specified in clauses (iv) or (v) of subsection (b)(12)(A); 

(E) documentation has been provided to the appropriate local 

educational agency showing the status of the child as a migratory child (as defined in section 1309 of the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6399)); 

(F)(i) documentation has been provided to the appropriate 

local educational agency showing the status of the child as a 

foster child whose care and placement is the responsibility of 

an agency that administers a State plan under part B or E of 

title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 621 et seq.); or 

(ii) documentation has been provided to the appropriate 

local educational agency showing the status of the child as 

a foster child who a court has placed with a caretaker 

household; or 

(G) documentation has been provided to the appropriate local 

educational agency showing the status of the child as an eligible child (as defined in subsection (b)(15)(A)). 

(e) A school or school food authority participating in a program 

under this Act may not contract with a food service company to 

provide a la carte food service unless the company agrees to offer 

free, reduced price, and full-price reimbursable meals to all eligible 

children. 

(f) NUTRITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Schools that are participating in the school 

lunch program or school breakfast program shall serve lunches 

and breakfasts that— 

(A) are consistent with the goals of the most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans published under section 301 

of the National Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research 

Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5341); and 

(B) consider the nutrient needs of children who may be 

at risk for inadequate food intake and food insecurity. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
116 

(2) To assist schools in meeting the requirements of this subsection, the Secretary— 

(A) shall— 

(i) develop, and provide to schools, standardized recipes, 

menu cycles, and food product specification and preparation techniques; and 

(ii) provide to schools information regarding nutrient 

standard menu planning, assisted nutrient standard menu 

planning, and food-based menu systems; and 

(B) may provide to schools information regarding other approaches, as determined by the Secretary. 

(3) USE OF ANY REASONABLE APPROACH.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—A school food service authority may use 

any reasonable approach, within guidelines established by the 

Secretary in a timely manner, to meet the requirements of this 

subsection, including— 

(i) using the school nutrition meal pattern in effect for 

the 1994–1995 school year; and 

(ii) using any of the approaches described in paragraph 

(3). 

(B) NUTRIENT ANALYSIS.—The Secretary may not require a 

school to conduct or use a nutrient analysis to meet the requirements of this subsection. 

(4) WAIVER OF REQUIREMENT FOR WEIGHTED AVERAGES FOR

NUTRIENT ANALYSIS.—During the period ending on September 

30, 2010, the Secretary shall not require the use of weighted 

averages for nutrient analysis of menu items and foods offered 

or served as part of a meal offered or served under the school 

lunch program under this Act or the school breakfast program 

under section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 

1773). 

(g) Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall provide a notification to Congress that 

justifies the need for production records required under section 

210.10(b) of title 7, Code of Federal Regulations, and describes how 

the Secretary has reduced paperwork relating to the school lunch 

and school breakfast programs. 

(h) FOOD SAFETY.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—A school participating in the school lunch 

program under this Act or the school breakfast program under 

section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773) 

shall— 

(A) at least twice during each school year, obtain a food 

safety inspection conducted by a State or local governmental agency responsible for food safety inspections; 

(B) post in a publicly visible location a report on the 

most recent inspection conducted under subparagraph (A); 

and 

(C) on request, provide a copy of the report to a member 

of the public. 

(2) STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT INSPECTIONS.—Nothing in 

paragraph (1) prevents any State or local government from 

adopting or enforcing any requirement for more frequent food 

safety inspections of schools. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
117 

(3) AUDITS AND REPORTS BY STATES.—øFor fiscal year 2019¿ 

For fiscal years 2020 and 2021, each State shall annually— 

(A) audit food safety inspections of schools conducted 

under paragraphs (1) and (2); and 

(B) submit to the Secretary a report of the results of the 

audit. 

(4) AUDIT BY THE SECRETARY.—øFor fiscal year 2019¿ For fiscal years 2020 and 2021, the Secretary shall annually audit 

State reports of food safety inspections of schools submitted 

under paragraph (3). 

(5) SCHOOL FOOD SAFETY PROGRAM.— (A) IN GENERAL.—Each school food authority shall implement a school food safety program, in the preparation and 

service of each meal served to children, that complies with 

any hazard analysis and critical control point system established by the Secretary. 

(B) APPLICABILITY.—Subparagraph (A) shall apply to any 

facility or part of a facility in which food is stored, prepared, or served for the purposes of the school nutrition 

programs under this Act or section 4 of the Child Nutrition 

Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773). 

(i) SINGLE PERMANENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN STATE AGENCY AND

SCHOOL FOOD AUTHORITY; COMMON CLAIMS FORM.— (1) IN GENERAL.—If a single State agency administers any 

combination of the school lunch program under this Act, the 

school breakfast program under section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773), the summer food service program for children under section 13 of this Act, or the child and 

adult care food program under section 17 of this Act, the agency shall— 

(A) require each school food authority to submit to the 

State agency a single agreement with respect to the operation by the authority of the programs administered by the 

State agency; and 

(B) use a common claims form with respect to meals and 

supplements served under the programs administered by 

the State agency. 

(2) ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT.—The agreement described in 

paragraph (1)(A) shall be a permanent agreement that may be 

amended as necessary. 

(j) PURCHASES OF LOCALLY PRODUCED FOODS.—The Secretary 

shall— 

(1) encourage institutions receiving funds under this Act and 

the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.) to purchase unprocessed agricultural products, both locally grown 

and locally raised, to the maximum extent practicable and appropriate; 

(2) advise institutions participating in a program described 

in paragraph (1) of the policy described in that paragraph and 

paragraph (3) and post information concerning the policy on 

the website maintained by the Secretary; and 

(3) allow institutions receiving funds under this Act and the 

Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), including 

the Department of Defense Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, to use a geographic preference for the procurement of 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
118 

unprocessed agricultural products, both locally grown and locally raised. 

(k) INFORMATION ON THE SCHOOL NUTRITION ENVIRONMENT.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall— 

(A) establish requirements for local educational agencies 

participating in the school lunch program under this Act 

and the school breakfast program established by section 4 

of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773) to report information about the school nutrition environment, 

for all schools under the jurisdiction of the local educational agencies, to the Secretary and to the public in the 

State on a periodic basis; and 

(B) provide training and technical assistance to States 

and local educational agencies on the assessment and reporting of the school nutrition environment, including the 

use of any assessment materials developed by the Secretary. 

(2) REQUIREMENTS.—In establishing the requirements for reporting on the school nutrition environment under paragraph 

(1), the Secretary shall— 

(A) include information pertaining to food safety inspections, local wellness policies, meal program participation, 

the nutritional quality of program meals, and other information as determined by the Secretary; and 

(B) ensure that information is made available to the 

public by local educational agencies in an accessible, easily 

understood manner in accordance with guidelines established by the Secretary. 

(3) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection such sums 

as are necessary for each of fiscal years 2011 through 2015. 

(l) FOOD DONATION PROGRAM.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Each school and local educational agency 

participating in the school lunch program under this Act may 

donate any food not consumed under such program to eligible 

local food banks or charitable organizations. 

(2) GUIDANCE.— (A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date 

of the enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall develop and publish guidance to schools and local educational agencies participating in the school lunch program 

under this Act to assist such schools and local educational 

agencies in donating food under this subsection. 

(B) UPDATES.—The Secretary shall update such guidance 

as necessary. 

(3) LIABILITY.—Any school or local educational agency making donations pursuant to this subsection shall be exempt from 

civil and criminal liability to the extent provided under the Bill 

Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act (42 U.S.C. 1791). 

(4) DEFINITION.—In this subsection, the term ‘‘eligible local 

food banks or charitable organizations’’ means any food bank 

or charitable organization which is exempt from tax under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 

501(c)(3)). 

* * * * * * * 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
119 

SEC. 26. INFORMATION CLEARINGHOUSE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall enter into a contract with 

a nongovernmental organization described in subsection (b) to establish and maintain a clearinghouse to provide information to 

nongovernmental groups located throughout the United States that 

assist low-income individuals or communities regarding food assistance, self-help activities to aid individuals in becoming self-reliant, 

and other activities that empower low-income individuals or communities to improve the lives of low-income individuals and reduce 

reliance on Federal, State, or local governmental agencies for food 

or other assistance. 

(b) NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION.—The nongovernmental 

organization referred to in subsection (a) shall be selected on a 

competitive basis and shall— 

(1) be experienced in the gathering of first-hand information 

in all the States through onsite visits to grassroots organizations in each State that fight hunger and poverty or that assist 

individuals in becoming self-reliant; 

(2) be experienced in the establishment of a clearinghouse 

similar to the clearinghouse described in subsection (a); 

(3) agree to contribute in-kind resources towards the establishment and maintenance of the clearinghouse and agree to 

provide clearinghouse information, free of charge, to the Secretary, States, counties, cities, antihunger groups, and grassroots organizations that assist individuals in becoming self-sufficient and self-reliant; 

(4) be sponsored by an organization, or be an organization, 

that— 

(A) has helped combat hunger for at least 10 years; 

(B) is committed to reinvesting in the United States; and 

(C) is knowledgeable regarding Federal nutrition programs; 

(5) be experienced in communicating the purpose of the 

clearinghouse through the media, including the radio and print 

media, and be able to provide access to the clearinghouse information through computer or telecommunications technology, as 

well as through the mails; and 

(6) be able to provide examples, advice, and guidance to 

States, counties, cities, communities, antihunger groups, and 

local organizations regarding means of assisting individuals 

and communities to reduce reliance on government programs, 

reduce hunger, improve nutrition, and otherwise assist low-income individuals and communities become more self-sufficient. 

(c) AUDITS.—The Secretary shall establish fair and reasonable 

auditing procedures regarding the expenditures of funds to carry 

out this section. 

(d) FUNDING.—Out of any moneys in the Treasury not otherwise 

appropriated, the Secretary of the Treasury shall pay to the Secretary to provide to the organization selected under this section, to 

establish and maintain the information clearinghouse, $200,000 for 

each of fiscal years 1995 and 1996, $150,000 for fiscal year 1997, 

$100,000 for fiscal year 1998, $166,000 for each of fiscal years 1999 

through 2004, and $250,000 for each of fiscal years ø2010 through 

2019¿ 2010 through 2021. The Secretary shall be entitled to receive 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
120 

the funds and shall accept the funds, without further appropriation. 

* * * * * * * 

RURAL ELECTRIFICATION ACT OF 1936 

TITLE I 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 2. GENERAL AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE. 

(a) LOANS.—The Secretary of Agriculture (referred to in this Act 

as the ‘‘Secretary’’) is authorized and empowered to make loans, or 

refinance loans ømade by the Secretary¿ made or guaranteed by 

the Secretary under this Act, in the several States and Territories 

of the United States for rural electrification and for the purpose of 

furnishing and improving electric and telephone service in rural 

areas, as provided in this Act, and for the purpose of assisting electric borrowers to implement demand side management, energy efficiency and conservation programs, and on-grid and off-grid renewable energy systems. 

(b) INVESTIGATIONS AND REPORTS.—The Secretary may make, or 

cause to be made, studies, investigations, and reports regarding 

matters, including financial, technological, and regulatory matters, 

affecting the condition and progress of electric, telecommunications, 

and economic development in rural areas, and publish and disseminate information with respect to the matters. 

(c) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—Not later than 180 days after the 

date of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall enter into 

a memorandum of understanding with the Secretary of Energy 

under which the Secretary of Energy shall provide technical assistance to the Rural Utilities Service on loans to be made under subsection (a) of this section and section 4(a). 

* * * * * * * 

CHANGES IN THE APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1)(A) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the following statements are submitted 

describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill that directly or indirectly change the application of existing law. 

The bill includes a number of provisions which place limitations 

on the use of funds in the bill or change existing limitations and 

that might, under some circumstances, be construed as changing 

the application of existing law: 

1. Office of the Secretary.—Language is included to limit the 

amount of funds for official reception and representation expenses, 

as determined by the Secretary. 

2. Departmental Administration.—Language is included to reimburse the agency for travel expenses incident to the holding of 

hearings. 

3. Economic Research Service.—Language is included to prohibit 

the use of funds to relocate the Economic Research Service outside 

the National Capital Region. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
121 

4. Agricultural Research Service.—Language is included that allows the Agricultural Research Service to grant easements at the 

Beltsville, MD, agricultural research center and to grant easements 

at any facility for the construction of a research facility for use by 

the agency. 

5. Agricultural Research Service.—Language is included to limit 

the amount of funds that may be obligated to support the National 

Bio and Agro-Defense Facility. 

6. National Institute of Food and Agriculture.—Language is included to prohibit the use of funds to relocate the National Institute of Food and Agriculture outside the National Capital Region. 

7. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.—The bill includes 

language regarding state matching funds and the brucellosis control program through state cost sharing. 

Language is included to allow APHIS to recoup expenses incurred from providing technical assistance goods, or services to 

non-APHIS personnel, and to allow transfers of funds for agricultural emergencies. 

Language is included to limit the amount of funds for representational allowances. 

Language is included to limit the amount of funds that may be 

obligated to support the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility. 

8. Agricultural Marketing Service, Limitation on Administrative 

Expenses.—The bill includes language to allow AMS to exceed the 

limitation on administrative expenses by 10 percent with notification to the Appropriations Committees. 

9. Agricultural Marketing Service, Inspection and Weighing Services.—The bill includes authority to exceed the limitation on inspection and weighing services by 10 percent with notification to the 

Appropriations Committees. 

10. Food Safety and Inspection Service.—Language is included to 

limit the amount of funds for representational allowances. 

11. Dairy Indemnity Program.—Language is included by reference that allows the Secretary to utilize the services of the Commodity Credit Corporation for the purpose of making dairy indemnity payments. 

12. Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account.—Language is included that deems the pink bollworm a boll weevil for 

the purposes of administering the boll weevil loan program. 

13. Risk Management Agency.—Language is included to limit the 

amount of funds for official reception and representation expenses. 

14. Commodity Credit Corporation Fund.—Language is included 

to provide for the reimbursement appropriation. Language is also 

included to allow certain funds transferred from the Commodity 

Credit Corporation to be used for information resource management. In addition, language is included which limits the amount of 

funds that can be spent on operation and maintenance costs of 

CCC hazardous waste sites. 

15. Rural Development Salaries and Expenses.—Language is included to allow funds to be used for advertising and promotional 

activities. 

16. Rental Assistance Program.—Language is included that provides that agreements entered into during the current fiscal year 

be funded for a one-year period. Language also is included to renew 

contracts once during any 12-month period. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
122 

17. Office of Codex Alimentarius.—Language is included to limit 

the amount of funds for official reception and representation expenses. 

18. Foreign Agricultural Service.—Language is included to enable 

the agency to use funds received by an advance or by reimbursement to carry out its activities. 

19. McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child 

Nutrition Program Grants.—Language is included to specify the 

amount of funds available to purchase commodities described by 

subsection 3107(a)(2) of the Farm Security and Rural Investment 

Act of 2002. 

20. Food and Drug Administration, Salaries and Expenses.—Language is included to limit the amount of funds for official reception 

and representation expenses and to limit the usage of certain user 

fees. 

21. Commodity Futures Trading Commission.—Language is included to limit the amount of funds for official reception and representation expenses. Language is also included to allow the Commission to record prior year lease obligations. 

22. Farm Credit Administration.—The bill includes authority to 

exceed the limitation on assessments by 10 percent with notification to the Appropriations Committees. 

23. General Provisions.— 

Section 701.—The bill includes language regarding limits on 

motor vehicles. 

Section 702.—The bill includes language regarding changes to 

the Working Capital Fund of the Department of Agriculture and 

the National Finance Center. 

Section 703.—The bill includes language limiting funding provided in the bill to one year unless otherwise specified. 

Section 704.—This provision provides that none of the funds in 

this Act may be made available to pay indirect costs charged 

against competitive agricultural research, education, or extension 

grants awarded by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture 

in excess of 10 percent of total direct costs. 

Section 705.—This provision allows funds made available in the 

current fiscal year for the Rural Development Loan Fund program 

account; the Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans 

program account; and the Rural Housing Insurance Fund program 

account to remain available until expended to disburse obligations. 

Section 706.—Language is included that requires approval of the 

Chief Information Officer and the concurrence of the Executive Information Technology Investment Review Board for acquisition of 

new information technology systems or significant upgrades, and 

that prohibits the transfer of funds to the Office of the Chief Information Officer without the notification and prior approval of the 

Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress. 

Section 707.—Language is included regarding the availability of 

funds for certain conservation programs. 

Section 708.—Language is included regarding certain Rural Utilities Service Programs. 

Section 709.—Language is included that allows unobligated balances of the Farm Service Agency and Rural Development mission 

areas to be used for information technology purposes. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
123 

Section 710.—Language is included regarding the prohibition of 

first-class travel by the employees of agencies funded in this Act. 

Section 711.—Language is included regarding the funds of the 

Commodity Credit Corporation. 

Section 712.—Language is included that limits the amount of 

spending for USDA advisory committees. 

Section 713.—The bill includes language regarding computer networks. 

Section 714.—The bill includes language regarding Section 32 activities. 

Section 715.—Language is included that prohibits funds from 

being used to prepare a budget submission to Congress that assumes reductions from the previous year’s budget due to user fee 

proposals unless the submission also identifies spending reductions 

which should occur if the user fees are not enacted. 

Section 716.—The bill includes language regarding the reprogramming of funds by USDA. 

Section 717.—The bill includes language regarding the reprogramming of funds and notification requirements for FDA and 

CFTC. 

Section 718.—The bill includes language regarding fees for the 

guaranteed business and industry loan program. 

Section 719.—This provision prohibits the Department of Agriculture or the Food and Drug Administration from transmitting or 

making available to any non-Department of Agriculture or non-Department of Health and Human Services employee questions or responses to questions that are a result of information requested for 

the appropriations hearing process. 

Section 720.—The bill includes language regarding governmentsponsored news stories. 

Section 721.—This provision includes language regarding the detailing of any employee of the Department of Agriculture within 

that department. 

Section 722.—The bill includes language regarding eligibility for 

Rural Development programs. 

Section 723.—The bill includes language requiring spend plans. 

Section 724.—The bill includes a rescission of unobligated balances. 

Section 725.—The bill includes language regarding rural housing 

loans. 

Section 726.—The bill includes language regarding USDA loan 

programs. 

Section 727.—The bill includes language regarding the Working 

Capital Fund. 

Section 728.—The bill includes language regarding SNAP variety 

requirements. 

Section 729.—The bill includes language regarding housing loan 

programs. 

Section 730.—The bill includes language regarding consumer information. 

Section 731.—The bill includes language regarding FDA regulations. 

Section 732.—The bill includes language regarding Food for 

Peace. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
124 

Section 733.—The bill includes language regarding a Rural Development energy program. 

Section 734.—The bill includes language regarding USDA regulations. 

Section 735.—The bill includes language regarding FDA regulations. 

Section 736.—The bill includes language regarding animal welfare. 

Section 737.—The bill includes language regarding United States 

iron and steel products. 

Section 738.—The bill includes language regarding lobbying. 

Section 739.—The bill includes language regarding poultry products. 

Section 740.—The bill includes language regarding certain inspection activities. 

Section 741.—The bill includes language regarding Rural Development programs. 

Section 742.—The bill includes language regarding poultry products. 

Section 743.—The bill includes language regarding child nutrition programs. 

Section 744.—The bill includes language regarding the Healthy 

Food Financing Initiative. 

Section 745.—The bill includes language regarding citrus greening. 

Section 746.—The bill includes language regarding grape 

varietals. 

Section 747.—The bill includes language regarding school lunch 

programs. 

Section 748.—The bill includes language regarding rural 

broadband. 

Section 749.—The bill includes language regarding the National 

Institute of Food and Agriculture. 

Section 750.—The bill includes language regarding school breakfast programs. 

Section 751.—The bill includes language regarding FDA regulations. 

Section 752.—The bill includes language regarding Centers of 

Excellence. 

Section 753.—The bill includes language regarding assistance to 

rural hospitals. 

Section 754.—The bill provides funding for grants under section 

12502 of P.L. 115–334. 

Section 755.—The bill rescinds certain USDA balances. 

Section 756.—The bill includes language regarding the organic 

program. 

Section 757.—The bill includes language regarding demonstration projects for tribal organizations. 

Section 758.—The bill includes language regarding USDA agencies. 

Section 759.—The bill includes language regarding USDA agencies. 

Section 760.—The bill includes language regarding animal welfare. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
125 

Section 762.—The bill includes language regarding matching 

funds for certain research programs. 

Section 763.—The bill includes language regarding the school 

breakfast programs. 

Section 765.—The bill includes language regarding Rural Development loans. 

Section 766.—The bill includes language regarding research facilities. 

Section 767.—The bill includes language regarding research programs. 

Section 769.—The bill includes language regarding food loss. 

Section 770.—The bill includes language regarding nutrition programs. 

Section 771.—The bill includes language regarding pollinator research. 

Section 778.—The bill includes language regarding gene editing. 

Section 779.—The bill includes language regarding swine inspections. 

Section 780.—The bill includes language regarding Job Corps Civilian Conservation Centers. 

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1)(B) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in the accompanying bill which are not authorized by law for 

the period concerned: 

Agency/Program Last year of 

authorization 

Authorization level 

Appropriation 

in last year of 

authorization 

Appropriations 

in this bill 

CFTC ....................................................... 2013 Such sums $205,000,000 $315,000,000 

Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program ....... 2015 Such sums 16,548,000 18,548,000 

State Administrative Expenses .............. 2015 Such sums 263,686,000 315,130,000 

Summer Food Service Program .............. 2015 Such sums 495,521,000 551,928,000 

WIC ......................................................... 2015 Such sums 6,623,000,000 6,000,000,000 

Multi-Family Revitalization Program ..... 2016 Such sums 41,400,000 75,000,000 

Broadband Telecommunications Grants 2016 Such sums 34,500,000 50,000,000 

COMPARISON WITH THE BUDGET RESOLUTION

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives and section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974, the following table compares the levels of new 

budget authority provided in the bill with the appropriate allocation under section 302(b) of the Budget Act: 

[In millions of dollars] 

302 (b) Allocation This Bill 

Budget 

Authority Outlays Budget Authority Outlays 

Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations to its subcommittees: Subcommittee on 

Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies 

Discretionary .......................................................... 24,310 22,900 24,3101 22,787 

Mandatory .............................................................. 104,784 97,151 104,7841 97,151 

1 Includes outlays from pnor-year budget authority. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
126 

NOTE—The amounts in this report do not include $75,000,000 in discretionary budget authority and $64,000,000 in associated outlays provided for the purposes specified in the 21st Century Cures Act (Public Law 114–255) Pursuant to title I of that act, such funding does not 

count for the purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, 1AIn addition, the amounts in this report do not include $8,000,000 in discretionary budget authority, and $1,848,000,000 in discretionary 

outlays from funding provided by the Additional Supplemental Appropnations for Disaster Relief Act, 2019, that was designated as being for 

emergency requirements pursuant to section 251 of the Balanced Budget Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 Con- sistent with the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, in the House of Representatives such amounts do not count against the Committee’s allo- cation 

FIVE-YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives and section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974, the following table contains five-year projections associated with the budget authority provided in the accompanying bill as provided to the Committee by the Congressional 

Budget Office: 

[In millions of dollars] 

Outlays Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2020 1 .................................................................................................................................................... 102,992 

2021 ...................................................................................................................................................... 6,986 

2022 ...................................................................................................................................................... 1,661 

2023 ...................................................................................................................................................... 866 

2024 and future years .......................................................................................................................... 582 

1 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives and section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974, the Congressional Budget Office has provided 

the following estimates of the amounts of financial assistance to 

State and local governments is as follows: 

[In millions of dollars] 

Budget 

Authority Outlays 

Financial assistance to State and local governments for 2020 ................................ 40,171/1/ 24,463 

1 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

COMMITTEE HEARINGS

For the purposes of section 103(i) of H. Res. 6 of the 116th Congress— 

The following hearings were used to develop or consider the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and 

Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2020: 

The Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and 

Drug Administration, and Related Agencies (Subcommittee) held 

an oversight hearing on February 27, 2019, entitled ‘‘Food and 

Drug Administration—Status of Operations’’. The Subcommittee received testimony from: 

• Scott Gottlieb, MD, Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration 

The Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on March 12, 2019, 

entitled ‘‘USDA Office of Inspector General.’’ The Subcommittee received testimony from: • Phyllis Fong, Inspector General, USDA • Gil Harden, Assistant Inspector General, USDA 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
127 

• Ann Coffey, Assistant Inspector General, USDA 

The Subcommittee held a hearing on March 26, 2019, entitled 

‘‘Member Day.’’ The Subcommittee received testimony from: • The Honorable Neal P. Dunn, Member of Congress • The Honorable Jennifer Gonza ́lez-Colo ́n, Member of Congress • The Honorable Shelia Jackson Lee, Member of Congress • The Honorable James P. McGovern, Member of Congress • The Honorable Bill Posey, Member of Congress • The Honorable Glenn Thompson, Member of Congress 

The Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on March 27, 2019, 

entitled ‘‘USDA’s Proposed Relocation of the Economic Research 

Service and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture.’’ The 

Subcommittee received testimony from: • Kristi J. Boswell, Senior Advisor to the Secretary of Agriculture, USDA • Gale A. Buchanan, Ph.D., former Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics, USDA • Katherine Smith Evans, Ph.D., for Administrator for the 

Economic Research Service, USDA • John E. Lee, Jr., Ph.D., for Administrator for the Economic 

Research Service, USDA • Catherine E. Woteki, Ph.D., former Under Secretary for 

Research, Education, and Economics, USDA 

The Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on April 2, 2019, 

entitled ‘‘The Rural Economy’’. The Subcommittee received testimony from: • Jeffery S. Hall, Board Chairman, Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation • Rod Hebrink, President and CEO, Compeer Farm Credit, 

Sun Prairie, WI • Mark Jensen, President and CEO, FCS of America/Frontier Farm Credit, Omaha, NE • Paxton Poitevint, President and CEO, Southwest Georgia 

Farm Credit, Bainbridge, GA 

• Dallas P. Tonsager, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, 

Farm Credit Administration 

The Subcommittee held a budget hearing on April 3, 2019, entitled ‘‘Food and Drug Administration Budget Request for FY 2020’’. 

The Subcommittee received testimony from: 

• Scott Gottlieb, M.D., Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration 

The Subcommittee held a budget hearing on April 9, 2019, entitled ‘‘Department of Agriculture Budget Request for Fiscal Year 

2020’’. The Subcommittee received testimony from: 

• The Honorable Sonny Perdue, Secretary, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture 

• Ms. Erica Navarro, Budget Officer, U.S. Department of Agriculture 

The Subcommittee held a hearing on April 10, 2019, entitled 

‘‘Economic Opportunities for Farmers through Sustainable Agricultural Practices’’. The Subcommittee received testimony from: 

• Kevin Norton, Acting Associate Chief, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service, USDA 

• Nate Powell-Palm, Certified Organic Farmer, Montana 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
128 

• Jason Weller, Senior Director of Sustainability, Land O’ 

Lakes SUSTAIN, Minnesota 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF BUDGETARY RESOURCES


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
129 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 052 here HR107.003
130 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 53 here HR107.004
131 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 54 here HR107.005
132 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 55 here HR107.006
133 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 56 here HR107.007
134 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 57 here HR107.008
135 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 58 here HR107.009
136 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 59 here HR107.010
137 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 60 here HR107.011
138 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 61 here HR107.012
139 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 62 here HR107.013
140 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 63 here HR107.014
141 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 64 here HR107.015
142 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 65 here HR107.016
143 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 66 here HR107.017
144 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 67 here HR107.018
145 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 68 here HR107.019
146 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 69 here HR107.020
147 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 70 here HR107.021
148 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 71 here HR107.022
149 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 72 here HR107.023
150 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 73 here HR107.024
151 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 74 here HR107.025
152 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 75 here HR107.026
153 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 76 here HR107.027
154 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 77 here HR107.028
(155) 

MINORITY VIEWS 

We appreciate the collegial and collaborative efforts of Subcommittee Chair, Sanford Bishop, and the Full Committee Chair, 

Nita Lowey, in producing an Agriculture, Rural Development, Food 

and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill 

that addresses priorities of Members on both sides of the aisle. We 

have policy differences with the Majority in a limited number of 

circumstances, and a divergence in views over the level of funding 

necessary to address the critical needs of this bill, but we can and 

will continue to work together in a bipartisan, collaborative manner as the process moves forward. 

We are most pleased by the continuation of the Republicans’ previous commitment to work with the private sector in rebuilding or 

building the economic vitality of rural America through a 

$3,400,000,000 investment in critical infrastructure and business 

programs at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The Majority includes report language to encourage the USDA to consider 

the broader social benefits when the Department seeks applications 

for the $680,000,000 of broadband resources in this bill. It is very 

important that we measure the impact of broadband in how it affects the ecosystem of livability. Not just more wires, but livability 

from enhanced telehealth, telecommuting, and precision agriculture, and other applications to make broadband an effective infrastructure investment. 

We are also pleased to see an increase of $185,000,000 for the 

Food and Drug Administration. Between investments in fiscal year 

2019 and investments in this bill, the agency will receive an increase of $27,000,000 to help expedite the approval of safe and effective generic drugs, increase competition, lower drug prices, and 

lessen the financial burden on the American consumer. The Majority also provided other agreed upon increases for the safety of new, 

innovative medical devices that will improve public health and 

allow U.S. businesses to remain competitive in this field. Lastly, we 

agree with investments in food safety by lessening the burden on 

our state health departments. These resources support our states 

who are the ones who often apply the FDA’s high standard for production of foods across the country. 

We are deeply concerned that the Majority party passed ten of 

twelve appropriations bills out of Committee without first reaching 

a bipartisan, bicameral agreement with the Senate and the Administration. This bill is $1,000,000,000 above the fiscal year 2019 

enacted level. No doubt there are critical programs in this bill deserving of strong Congressional support, but that sentiment in no 

way negates the need for an over-arching plan for fiscal responsibility. The House Democrats’ budget framework would raise the 

discretionary spending caps and put the Federal government on 

track to add to the national debt, which is already above 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS
156 

$22,000,000,000,000 and rising. We fear this is setting us up for a 

scenario that could end in a year-long continuing resolution at 

best—or another protracted government shutdown at worst. 

In addition to overall funding concerns, Republican Members of 

the Committee were disappointed by several policy provisions. 

Some of the provisions encourage violation of federal law or Congressional intent, at a minimum. For example, the Majority included language under the heading of the Office of the Secretary 

relating to Grain Export Inspection. The language ‘‘strongly discourages USDA from requiring its grain inspectors to cross a picket 

line’’. Such language is irresponsible when the Grain Inspections 

Act clearly obligates inspectors to conduct inspections unless the 

Secretary were to waive the requirement for safety reasons. Using 

USDA inspectors in a labor dispute and interfering with the export 

sales of U.S. product during an already turbulent international 

trade environment is completely unnecessary. 

We are also disappointed to see language inserted throughout the 

bill that ties the hands of the Administration in many ways. The 

bill restricts the abilities of a Cabinet Secretary to reorganize agencies and transfer and reprogram funds. These changes will hinder 

the administration’s ability to improve operational efficiencies and 

respond quickly to changing resource needs. Such constraints are 

unreasonable, and we believe are being done purely to limit the 

ability of an Administration from an opposing political party to fulfill its responsibilities. 

Starting with the fiscal year 2016 Omnibus appropriation act, 

the Committee acted to prevent any emerging science that would 

allow for the clinical germline gene editing. As of today, this prohibition is accepted by nearly every nation in the world due to known 

and unknown risks. Recognizing the bipartisan concern about the 

absence of this provision, the Committee wisely accepted the 

amendment by Republican Representative Robert Aderholt to restore this prohibition until the broader international community of 

public health experts can understand the science, ethics, and reason associated with this research and determine ways to reduce 

risks to the lives of future individuals and society. The agreement 

on this amendment represented a shining moment for the Committee as we came together for the good of all humanity. 

Despite our disagreements over the issues discussed above, we 

appreciate the Majority’s willingness to address Member priorities 

in the bill and report and to include Minority Committee Members 

in the development of the bill. The Subcommittee has a long-standing tradition of bipartisanship, and we will continue to work in 

good faith with our colleagues as we proceed through the appropriations process. By working together, we can best address the 

needs of our rural communities, the safety of our food supply and 

medical products, the soundness of our commodity markets, and 

the strength of our Nation’s farmers, ranchers, and producers who 

serve as the foundation of America’s prosperity, stability, and economic vitality. We are fortunate to have such a diverse and plentiful food supply that is made possible through hard work and the 

programs in this bill that assist farmers and ranchers across the 

country and the world. KAY GRANGER. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with REPORTS