```

[Senate Report 110-465]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

110th Congress 
 2d Session                      SENATE                          Report
                                                                110-465
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     

                                                       Calendar No. 970

                E-GOVERNMENT REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2007

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                              COMMITTEE ON

                         HOMELAND SECURITY AND

                          GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                              to accompany

                                S. 2321

     TO AMEND THE E-GOVERNMENT ACT OF 2002 (PUBLIC LAW 107-347) TO 
           REAUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

 

               September 16, 2008.--Ordered to be printed
        COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

               JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan                 SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii              TED STEVENS, Alaska
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware           GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas              NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana          TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
BARACK OBAMA, Illinois               PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri           JOHN WARNER, Virginia
JON TESTER, Montana                  JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire

                  Michael L. Alexander, Staff Director
                     Kevin J. Landy, Chief Counsel
              Adam R. Sedgewick, Professional Staff Member
     Brandon L. Milhorn, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
                    John K. Grant, Minority Counsel
                  Trina Driessnack Tyrer, Chief Clerk
                                                       Calendar No. 970
110th Congress
                                 SENATE
                                                                 Report
 2d Session                                                     110-465

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

 
                E-GOVERNMENT REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2007

                                _______
                                

               September 16, 2008.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Lieberman, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
                    Affairs, submitted the following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 2321]

    The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs, to which was referred the bill (S. 2321) to amend the 
E-Government Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-347) to reauthorize 
appropriations, and for other purposes, having considered the 
same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment and 
recommends that the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
  I. Purpose and Summary..............................................1
 II. Background and Need for the Legislation..........................1
III. Legislative History..............................................5
 IV. Section-by-Section Analysis......................................6
  V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact..................................8
 VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................8
VII. Changes to Existing Law.........................................11

                         I. Purpose and Summary

    S. 2321 is a bipartisan bill to reauthorize the E-
Government Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-347). The bill extends 
appropriations for programs whose authorizations of 
appropriations have expired, creates new requirements for the 
accessibility of government information, and mandates the 
development of best practices to enhance privacy impact 
assessments.

              II. Background and Need for the Legislation

    The E-Government Act of 2002 improved the management and 
promotion of electronic government services; enhanced the 
public's access to information over the Internet and its 
ability to participate in regulatory processes; and 
strengthened privacy protections. S. 2321 will ensure that this 
progress will continue and requires that additional steps be 
taken to further develop E-Government solutions across the 
government.
    The E-Government Act established an Office of Electronic 
Government (hereinafter ``the Office'') in the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) to ``provide effective leadership 
of Federal Government efforts to develop and promote electronic 
Government services and processes.''\1\ Information Technology 
(IT) represents a significant portion of the Federal budget, 
with OMB estimating that the federal government will spend over 
$71 billion on IT projects in FY 2009. The E-Government Act 
created a substantial role for the Office in overseeing the 
expenditure of these funds. The Office also oversees the cross-
agency E-Government initiatives that have been designed to help 
reach the goal of ``systems based on functionality and the 
needs of the citizen rather than agency jurisdiction.''\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Pub. L. No. 107-347 Sec. 2.
    \2\S. Rept. 107-174, 107th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2002), pg. 6. (S. 803 
was the original version of the E-Government Act; the legislation was 
subsequently enacted as H.R. 2458).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Among the programs being re-authorized in S. 2321 is the 
Federal Internet Portal, which can now be found at USA.gov. In 
FY 2007, USA.gov received approximately 97 million visits.\3\ 
This portal provides a single website where government 
information and services are organized by subject and function.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\Testimony of Karen S. Evans before the Senate Committee on 
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, December 11, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    S. 2321 also extends authorizations for Section 207(g) of 
the E-Government Act, which required the development and 
maintenance of a government-wide repository and website to 
fully integrate information about research and development 
funded by the federal government. This mandate is not being 
fully met and the Committee intends that the funds authorized 
in this Act further develop this repository. As the Committee 
stated when reporting out the E-Government Act: ``Integrating 
information about research and development across agencies, and 
making that information electronically accessible and 
searchable, will enhance scientific coordination and 
collaboration and the transfer of technology, improve oversight 
by policymakers and provide the public with access to 
meaningful information about research funded by the 
government.''\4\ While OMB continues to implement the Federal 
Funding and Transparency Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-282), which 
requires disclosure on a publicly accessible website of non-
federal entities receiving federal funding (currently located 
at www.usaspending.gov), the Committee believes that OMB should 
consider incorporating the information required by Section 
207(g) that relates to research and development into this 
website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\S. Rept. 107-174, 107th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2002), pg. 27. (S. 803 
was the original version of the E-Government Act; the legislation was 
subsequently enacted as H.R. 2458).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Another provision that will have its authorizations 
extended in S. 2321 is the Federal Information Security 
Management Act (FISMA), which was another critical component of 
the original E-Government Act. FISMA established guidelines for 
computer security throughout the federal government and 
provided for both OMB and Congressional oversight. Using the 
framework established by FISMA, agencies have taken significant 
strides in protecting their information systems since the 
passage of the Act, but the Committee believes more needs to be 
done to protect against information security breaches and 
abuse.
    One of the central goals of the E-Government Act, which S. 
2321 is intended to reinforce, is promoting the use of the 
Internet to improve citizens' access to government services and 
information. But at the same time, the Act reflected 
recognition by Congress that the federal government's over-
reliance on Internet solutions could limit access to government 
services and information for those lacking easy access to the 
Internet.\5\ This concern remains relevant. The Committee does 
not intend that E-Government solutions entirely replace 
alternative ways for the public to apply for federal benefits 
or seek information from federal agencies. Recent studies have 
suggested that as federal agencies decrease the availability of 
non-Internet mechanisms and some government forms become more 
complex, public libraries and other entities are increasingly 
burdened with providing computer and Internet access and 
assisting the public in their interactions with federal 
agencies.\6\ The goals of the E-Government Act, and the 
Committee's intent in reauthorizing that Act, are to maximize 
technology's potential to enhance access to federal information 
and services. The Committee believes that these goals should be 
considered when OMB and federal agencies develop E-Government 
programs and tools that require access to the internet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\Pub. L. No. 107-347, see Sec. 213 (requiring federal agencies to 
support community technology centers and public libraries that offer 
the public Internet access to government information and services), 
Sec. 215 (requiring a study of how disparities in Internet access 
influence the effectiveness of online government services).
    \6\See John Bertot et al, Public access computing and Internet 
Access in Public Libraries: The role of public libraries in E-
Government and emergency situation, 11 First Monday 9 /
firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_9/bertot/index.html>. (``Increasingly, 
government agencies refer individuals to their local public libraries 
for assistance and technology to complete their interactions and meet 
their government services needs. The significance to this development 
is that public libraries, in the eyes of federal, state, and local 
government agencies, are seen as part of the larger governmental fabric 
that deliver a range of services--including emergency services--to its 
citizens.'')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

             BEST PRACTICES FOR PRIVACY IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

    Section 208 of the E-Government Act of 2002 requires 
agencies to complete a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for any 
new information technology or new collection of information 
that collects, maintains, or disseminates personal information. 
This provision requires that agencies take into account privacy 
considerations and adopt appropriate privacy protections before 
developing or procuring IT systems or initiating new 
information collections. PIAs ensure that program managers, 
privacy officers, and policy makers can review the potential 
privacy implications of new IT systems, and new programs or 
policies that involve the collection of personal information. 
When developed early and rigorously, PIAs can reassure the 
public that an information system will adequately secure 
personal information. In addition, they can result in savings 
of millions of dollars by identifying potential problems at an 
early stage of development, thus forestalling later costly 
redesigns of a system to bring it into compliance with privacy 
laws and regulations.
    Since the passage of the Act, PIAs--which are publicly 
available documents--have become a critical tool for agencies. 
But while some agencies have been quite successful with 
properly developing PIAs, policies for their use government-
wide are inconsistent and PIAs have varied dramatically in 
quality. As Ari Schwartz, Vice President and Chief Operating 
Officer, Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), testified 
before the Committee: ``While some agencies, like the 
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have set a high standard 
for PIAs and have continued to improve them over time, the lack 
of clear guidance has led some agencies to create cursory PIAs 
or none at all.''\7\ S. 2321 will enhance Section 208 of the E-
Government Act by requiring OMB to develop best practices for 
agencies to follow when creating PIAs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\Testimony of Ari Schwartz before the Senate Committee on 
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, December 11, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IMPROVING SEARCHES OF GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS ON THE WORLDWIDE WEB

    S. 2321 addresses another problem that has developed since 
the passage of the E-Government Act. Given the wealth of 
government information and services that is now available 
online, the Committee believes that that information must be 
presented in a format that allows it to be as accessible and 
useful as possible to the public. For technical reasons, the 
intended audience often cannot find much of the information 
that agencies place on their websites.
    A report by CDT and OMB Watch summarized the scope of the 
problem: ``[T]he federal government is putting more information 
and services online, but a considerable amount of government 
information is, for all practical purposes, invisible to many 
users. Many federal agencies operate Web sites that are simply 
not configured to enable access through popular search engines. 
These Web sites don't allow search engines to `crawl' them, an 
industry term for indexing online content, and sometimes even 
block sites from being found by search engines.''\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\``Hiding in Plain Sight: Why Important Government Information 
Cannot Be Found Through Commercial Search Engines,'' Center for 
Democracy & Technology and OMB Watch, December 2007, pg. 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To address this problem, the legislation requires OMB to 
promulgate guidance on making federal government information 
more accessible to search capabilities, including commercial 
search engines, and it requires that agencies comply with the 
guidance. Several companies that host search engines, including 
Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo, support a technical standard 
called the Sitemap Protocol which provides a mechanism for a 
website owner to produce a list of all web pages on a website 
and systematically communicate this information or ``sitemap'' 
to search engines. Using a sitemap, information will be more 
likely to be displayed in search results, regardless of the 
search engine being used. The Sitemap Protocol has already been 
used by federal agencies, including the Department of Energy's 
Office of Scientific and Technical Information, the Government 
Accountability Office, the Library of Congress, the National 
Agricultural Library, and the National Archives and Records 
Administration, to improve citizen access to their online 
resources. The Committee encourages the Director to include the 
Sitemap Protocol in its guidance to agencies, if it continues 
to find the protocol to be an effective means of making 
information more readily accessible.
    The Committee also believes this guidance should be used to 
encourage agencies to put more information in a structured 
format, such as extensible markup language (XML), which would 
allow this information to be harnessed and used by external 
applications and was recommended in Section 101 of the E-
Government Act.\9\ Data presented in this format allows for a 
rapid exchange of information that can be easily manipulated in 
a variety of ways by external websites, allowing for greater 
analysis of data.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\44 U.S.C. 3602(8)(b).
    \10\See Jerry Brito, Hack, Mash, & Peer, 9 Colum. Sci. & Tech L. 
Rev. 119 (2007-2008). (``As we have seen, ``structured data'' is a term 
of art. It means that information is presented in a format that allows 
computers to easily parse and manipulate it. While a static web page 
that lists a series of news stories or proposed regulations is not 
structured, the web page may have a companion XML file containing the 
same information. A structured XML file would allow a user to sort the 
data by ascending or descending date, alphabetically by headline or 
author, by number of words, and in many other ways that a static web 
page does not afford.'')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This legislation is not intended to limit the use of 
complex search applications included on government websites, 
including federated search capabilities, which may integrate 
multiple databases across many websites for public use.\11\ It 
also does not prevent agencies from using complex databases or 
other methods to present information to the public--merely to 
ensure that information is being presented in a way that 
guarantees maximum public access without impairing the 
integrity of the data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\For example science.gov pulls content from the 13 federal 
science agencies in response to queries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        III. Legislative History

    S. 2321 was introduced by Chairman Lieberman on November 7, 
2007 in the Senate, with Senators Collins and Carper as 
original co-sponsors. The bill was read twice and referred to 
the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

                                HEARING

    On December 11, 2007, the committee held a hearing 
entitled: ``E-Government 2.0: Improving Innovation, 
Collaboration, and Access,'' at which S. 2321 was discussed. 
The committee heard testimony from the following witnesses:
    Karen S. Evans, Administrator, Office of Electronic 
Government and Information Technology, Office of Management and 
Budget;
    John Lewis Needham, Manager, Public Sector Content 
Partnerships, Google, Inc.;
    Ari Schwartz, Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, 
Center for Democracy and Technology;
    Jimmy Wales, Founder, Wikipedia.
    Karen Evans testified regarding the federal government's 
progress in reaching the goals of the E-Government Act. She 
testified that ``reauthorization will allow the intent and 
purpose of the E-Government Act to continue to be a driving 
force behind providing increased opportunity for the American 
public to participate in government.''
    John Lewis Needham described what steps can be taken to 
present government information and services on the Internet in 
a format that would allow citizens to more easily access the 
material through commercial search engines. He stated that in 
its work with other government entities, Google has found that 
implementing the Sitemap Protocol is a technically simple and 
inexpensive solution that would substantially increase the 
ability of citizens to find government information and services 
online.
    Ari Schwartz of the Center for Democracy and Technology 
provided specific examples of government information that was 
on government websites but could not be found by commercial 
search engines, including Flood Map modernization databases 
from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, information 
relating to endangered species, and resources from the 
Smithsonian Institute. Schwartz also testified that the 
development of best practices for Privacy Impact Assessments, 
as mandated by S. 2321, would require OMB to provide better 
guidance and would improve the quality of agencies' PIAs.
    The last witness, Jimmy Wales, testified about the use of 
``wikis'' and possible applications to E-Government. Wales 
founded Wikipedia, which has used collaborative technology to 
inexpensively create an online encyclopedia--populated with 
information and edited by users of the site--with more than 9 
million pages in more than 150 languages. Wales testified: ``It 
is my belief that the government of the United States should be 
using wiki technology for both internal and public-facing 
projects. As with any large enterprise, internal communications 
problems are the cause of many inefficiencies and failures. 
Just as top corporations are finding wiki usage exploding, 
because the tool brings about new efficiencies, government 
agencies should be exploring these tools as well.''\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\Testimony of Jimmy Wales before the Senate Committee on 
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, December 11, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    The Committee considered S. 2321 on November 14, 2007. The 
Committee ordered the bill reported favorably without an 
amendment by voice vote. Members present for the vote were 
Lieberman, Carper, McCaskill, Tester, Collins, Stevens, 
Voinovich, Coleman, and Coburn.

                    IV. Section-by-Section Analysis

Section 1. Short title

    This section would permit the bill to be cited as the ``E-
Government Reauthorization Act of 2007.''

Section 2. Reauthorization of appropriations

    Subsection (a) extends through fiscal year 2012 the 
authorization of appropriations to carry out specified 
provisions of the E-Government Act of 2002. In particular, in 
subsection (a)(1) it extends the authorization of 
appropriations for the federal internet portal; in subsection 
(a)(2) it extends the authorizations of appropriations for the 
development and maintenance of a governmentwide repository and 
website for federally funded research and development; in 
section (a)(3) it extends the authorizations of appropriations 
for the study of best practices at community technology 
centers, for the development and dissemination of the online 
tutorial, and for the promotion of community technology 
centers; in section (a)(4) it extends the authorizations of 
appropriations for the development of common protocols for 
geographic information systems; and in section (a)(5) it 
extends the authorizations of appropriations for all provisions 
for which an authorization of appropriations is not 
specifically provided in titles I or II of the E-Government 
Act.
    Subsection (b) extends the authorization of appropriations 
until 2012 for the Federal Information Security Management Act 
of 2002.
    Subsection (c) extends the authorization of appropriations 
until 2012 for the E-Government Fund.
    Subsection (d) allows assignment under the Information 
Technology Exchange Program to occur in increments of 3 months 
to 1 year with the ability to be extended an additional 3 
months but may not commence after September 30, 2012.
    Subsection (e) extends the money appropriated to the 
Secretary of Commerce until fiscal year 2012 to carry out the 
Computer Standards Program by the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology.

Section 3. Best practices for privacy impact assessments

    This section amends the E-Government Act by requiring the 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget to develop best 
practices for agencies to follow in conducting privacy impact 
assessments.

Section 4. Improving searches of government information on the 
        worldwide web

    This section amends the E-Government Act by requiring the 
Director of OMB, within 1 year of the date of enactment, to 
promulgate guidance and best practices to ensure that publicly 
available federal government information and services are made 
more accessible to external search engines. The guidance and 
best practices shall include guidelines for each agency to test 
the accessibility of websites to external search engines. The 
Director shall conduct a periodic review to ensure that any 
guidelines and best practices are consistent with any advances 
made in information technology. The Director shall report 
annually to Congress on the progress of each agency's 
implementation of the guidelines and best practices and the 
results of the agencies' testing of the website to ensure that 
it is externally searchable by search engines.
    The section also states that within 2 years of enactment of 
S. 2321 each agency shall ensure compliance with the Director's 
guidelines and best practices. Agencies must report annually to 
the Director on their progress in complying with the best 
practices and guidance, including the result of any testing of 
agency websites.

Section 5. Providing agency E-Government reports to Congress

    The E-Government Act requires agencies to submit to the OMB 
Director an annual E-Government Status Report on the status of 
the agency's implementation of electronic government 
initiatives, its compliance with the E-Government Act, and how 
the agency's electronic government initiatives improve 
performance in delivering programs to the public. This section 
requires that the annual E-Government Status Reports submitted 
by agencies to the OMB Director also be submitted to Congress, 
along with a summary of the reports.

                   V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact

    Pursuant to the requirement of paragraph 11(b)(1) of rule 
XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate the Committee has 
considered the regulatory impact of this bill. The Committee 
believes that the bill strengthens government management 
practices and privacy protections, and will result in reduced 
costs for regulated entities. The legislation will not result 
in additional regulation, increased economic impact, adverse 
impact on personal privacy, or additional paperwork on any 
individuals or businesses.

             VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

                                                 December 3, 2007. 
Hon. Joseph I. Lieberman,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. 
        Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 2321, the E-
Government Reauthorization Act of 2007.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew 
Pickford.
            Sincerely,
                                                  Peter R. Orszag. 
    Enclosure.

S. 2321--E-Government Reauthorization Act of 2007

    Summary: S. 2321 would reauthorize and amend the E-
Government Act of 2002. The legislation would authorize 
appropriations for programs to improve the coordination, 
deployment, and access to government information and services. 
Specifically, S. 2321 would authorize and centralize many 
Internet-related activities currently underway throughout the 
government.
    Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO 
estimates that implementing S. 2321 would cost about $29 
billion over the 2008-2012 period. Of this total, $27.9 billion 
would result from the authorization of funding for the Federal 
Information Security Management Act (FISMA). Such costs, 
averaging about $6 billion a year, represent a continuation of 
the current level of spending, with adjustments for anticipated 
inflation.
    We also estimate that enacting S. 2321 would increase 
direct spending by $11 million over the 2008-2017 period for 
the cost of the unfunded termination liability of share-in-
savings (SIS) contracts authorized by the bill.
    S. 2321 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
cost of implementing S. 2321 is shown in the following table. 
The costs of this legislation fall within budget functions 250 
(general science, space, and technology), 500 (education, 
training, employment, and social services), and 800 (general 
government).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
                                                                       2008     2009     2010     2011     2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Federal Information Security Management Act:
    Estimated Authorization Level..................................    5,722    5,837    5,953    6,072    6,194
    Estimated Outlays..............................................    4,578    5,242    5,919    6,037    6,158
Other Programs:
    Estimated Authorization Level..................................      242      241      248      252      257
    Estimated Outlays..............................................      154      239      246      251      255
Total Changes:
    Estimated Authorization Level..................................    5,964    6,078    6,201    6,324    6,451
    Estimated Outlays..............................................    4,732    5,481    6,165    6,288    6,413
                                           CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING

    Estimated Budget Authority.....................................        *        1        1        2        2
    Estimated Outlays..............................................        *        1        1        2       2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: * = less than $500,000.

    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the 
necessary amounts will be provided each year and that spending 
will follow historical patterns for ongoing activities. CBO 
estimates that S. 2321 would authorize the appropriation of 
approximately $29 billion over the 2008-2012 period for the 
management and promotion of electronic government information 
services and processes. This estimate assumes that future 
funding would be adjusted for anticipated inflation.

                   SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

    The legislation would reauthorize and amend the E-
Government Act through 2012. The current authorization expired 
at the end of 2007. Significant components of the legislation 
are described below.
    Federal Information Security Management Act. As part of the 
E-Government Act of 2002, FISMA sets requirements for securing 
the government's information systems. The National Institute of 
Standards and Technology develops information security 
standards and guidelines for federal agencies, and OMB 
coordinates information technology security policies and 
practices. For fiscal year 2006, OMB estimates that federal 
agencies spent around $5.5 billion to secure the government's 
information systems. CBO estimates that continuing this level 
of effort would cost $27.9 billion over the 2008-2012 period. 
(That estimate reflects 2006 spending in this activity, 
adjusted for anticipated inflation.)

                             OTHER PROGRAMS

    The legislation would authorize the appropriation of such 
sums as necessary over the 2008-2012 period to operate the 
following programs:
     The General Services Administration's (GSA's) E-
Government Fund for interagency projects develops electronic 
signatures for executive agencies and maintains and promotes 
the federal Internet portal. This program supports interagency 
electronic government initiatives to provide individuals, 
businesses, and other governmental agencies with timely access 
to federal information, benefits, services, and business 
opportunities.
     The National Institute of Standards and 
Technology's Office of Information and Security Programs 
conducts research and issues standards related to the security 
of federal information systems.
     The Office of Personnel Management identifies 
information technology personnel needs for the federal 
workforce and provides training.
    In addition, the bill would authorize other government 
programs to develop and maintain databases and Web sites for 
federally funded research and to support research and education 
programs concerning electronic information systems.
    CBO estimates that continuing the current and new 
activities authorized by the bill for those programs would cost 
$1.1 billion over the 2008-2012 period, assuming that current 
funding would be adjusted for anticipated inflation.

                                SAVINGS

    The use of electronic information systems to collect 
information from the public and to provide government services 
could reduce administrative costs at federal agencies. 
Implementing S. 2321 could help the government achieve such 
savings; however, CBO has no basis for estimating any potential 
savings over the next few years.

                            DIRECT SPENDING

    S. 2321 would authorize federal agencies to use SIS 
contracts for the purchase of information technology 
consultants and hardware through September 2012. The bill would 
allow up to five contracts per year in fiscal years 2008 
through 2012.
    An SIS contract can be used to procure information 
processing products and services without an up-front payment. 
Payment for such goods and services would be made from any 
operational savings or increased collections generated by the 
use of such equipment or services. In addition, S. 2321 would 
allow agencies to enter into SIS contracts without funds 
available for the termination liability. The bill would limit 
the amount of such unfunded termination liability to $5 million 
per contract (or 25 percent of the termination costs, whichever 
is less).
    Based on information from GSA about the use of SIS 
contracts, CBO estimates that 10 percent of the SIS contracts 
authorized by S. 2321 would be terminated before completion. 
Assuming that SIS contracts have an average duration of five 
years and that the maximum termination liability could be 
incurred in any year, we estimate that this provision would 
cost $6 million over the 2008-2012 period and $11 million over 
the 2008-2017 period.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 2321 
contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in UMRA and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 
The bill would benefit the District of Columbia by allowing 
private organizations to assign their employees to the Office 
of the Chief Technology Officer, and allowing the office to 
assign its employees to private organizations. In either case, 
both the District and the private organizations must agree to 
such assignments.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Spending: Matthew Pickford; 
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Elizabeth Cove; 
Impact on the Private Sector: Paige Piper/Bach.
    Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Assistant Director 
for Budget Analysis.

               VII. Changes in Existing Law, as Reported

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the following changes in existing 
law made by the bill, as reported, are shown as follows: 
(existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black 
brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing law in 
which no change is proposed is shown in roman):

UNITED STATES CODE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

TITLE 5--GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES AND ORGANIZATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

PART III--EMPLOYEES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SUBPART B--EMPLOYMENT AND RETENTION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

CHAPTER 37--INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY EXCHANGE PROGRAM

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

Sec. 3702. General provisions

    (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (d) Duration.--Assignments under this chapter shall be for 
a period of between 3 months and 1 year, and may be extended in 
3-month increments for a total of not more than 1 additional 
year, except that no assignment under this chapter may commence 
after [the end of the 5-year period beginning on the date of 
the enactment of this chapter] September 30, 2012.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

TITLE 15--COMMERCE AND TRADE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

CHAPTER 7--NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

Sec. 278g-3. Computer standards programs

    (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
to be appropriated to the Secretary of Commerce $20,000,000 for 
each of fiscal years [2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007] 2003 
through 2012 to enable the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology to carry out the provisions of this section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

TITLE 44--PUBLIC PRINTING AND DOCUMENTS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

CHAPTER 35--COORDINATION OF FEDERAL INFORMATION POLICY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

Subchapter III--Information Security

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

Sec. 3548. Authorization of Appropriations

    There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the 
provisions of this subchapter such sums as may be necessary for 
each of fiscal years 2003 through [2007] 2012.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

CHAPTER 36--MANAGEMENT AND PROMOTION OF ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

Sec. 3604. E-Government Fund

    (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (g)(1) There are authorized to be appropriated to the 
Fund--

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (E) such sums are necessary for [fiscal year 2007] 
        fiscal years 2007 through 2012.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

Sec. 3606. E-Government report

    (a) * * *
    (b)[(1) a summary of the information reported by agencies 
under section 202(f) of the E-Government Act of 2002;] (1) the 
reports submitted by agencies to the Director under section 
202(g) of the E-Government Act of 2002, and a summary of the 
information reported by the agencies;
                              ----------                              

UNITED STATES PUBLIC LAW

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

E-GOVERNMENT ACT OF 2002 (PUBLIC LAW 107-347)

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

TITLE II

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SEC. 204. FEDERAL INTERNET PORTAL.

     (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
to be appropriated to the General Services Administration 
$15,000,000 for the maintenance, improvement, and promotion of 
the integrated Internet-based system for fiscal year 2003, and 
such sums as are necessary for fiscal years 2004 through [2007] 
2012.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SEC. 207. ACCESSIBILITY, USABILITY, AND PRESERVATION OF GOVERNMENT 
                    INFORMATION.

    (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (f) Agency Websites.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (4) Searchability of government websites.--
                  (A) Functions of the director.--
                          (i) Guidelines.--Not later than 1 
                        year after the date of enactment of the 
                        E-Government Reauthorization Act of 
                        2007, the Director shall promulgate 
                        guidance and best practices to ensure 
                        that publicly available online Federal 
                        Government information and services are 
                        made more accessible to external search 
                        capabilities, including commercial and 
                        governmental search capabilities. The 
                        guidance and best practices shall 
                        include guidelines for each agency to 
                        test the accessibility of the websites 
                        of that agency to external search 
                        capabilities.
                          (ii) Review.--The Director shall 
                        ensure periodic review of any guidance 
                        and best practices promulgated under 
                        clause (i) to ensure that the guidance 
                        and best practices are consistent with 
                        any advances made in information 
                        technology.
                          (iii) Reports.--The Director shall 
                        report annually to Congress, through 
                        the report established under section 
                        3606 of title 44, United States Code, 
                        on--
                                  (I) the progress of agencies 
                                with the guidance promulgated 
                                under clause (i); and
                                  (II) the results of the 
                                testing by agencies.
                  (B) Agency functions.--
                          (i) Compliance.--Effective on and 
                        after 2 years after the date of 
                        enactment of the E-Government Act of 
                        2007, each agency shall ensure 
                        compliance with any guidance 
                        promulgated under subparagraph (A).
                          (ii) Reports.--Each agency shall 
                        report annually to the Director, in the 
                        report established under section 
                        202(g), on--
                                  (I) the use of best practices 
                                and progress of that agency 
                                with the guidance promulgated 
                                under subparagraph (A); and
                                  (II) the results of the 
                                testing by that agency.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (g) Access to Federally Funded Research and Development.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (5) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
        authorized to be appropriated for the development, 
        maintenance, and operation of the Governmentwide 
        repository and website under this subsection--
                  (A) * * *
                  (B) such sums are necessary in each of the 
                fiscal years 2006 [and 2007] through 2012.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SEC. 208. PRIVACY PROVISIONS.

    (a) * * *
    (b) Privacy Impact Assessments.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (3) Responsibilities of the director.--The Director 
        shall--
                  (A) * * *
                  (B) oversee the implementation of the privacy 
                impact assessment process throughout the 
                Government; [and]
                  (C) require agencies to conduct privacy 
                impact assessments of existing information 
                systems or ongoing collections of information 
                that is in an identifiable form as the Director 
                determines appropriate[.]; and
                  (D) develop best practices for agencies to 
                follow in conducting privacy impact 
                assessments.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SEC. 213. COMMUNITY TECHNOLOGY CENTERS.

    (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (h) Authorization of Appropriations.--
          (1) * * *
          (2) * * *
          (3) such sums as are necessary in fiscal years 2005 
        through [2007] 2012.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SEC. 216. COMMON PROTOCOLS FOR GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS.

    (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this 
section, for each of the fiscal years 2003 through [2007] 2012.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

TITLE IV

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SEC. 401. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    Except for those purposes for which an authorization of 
appropriations is specifically provided in Title I or II, 
including the amendments made by such titles, there are 
authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to 
carry out titles I and II for each of fiscal years 2003 through 
[2007] 2012.

                                  

```