20–422 PDF 

Calendar No. 520 

114TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 114–280 

FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2017 

JUNE 16, 2016.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. BOOZMAN of Arkansas, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 3067] 

The Committee on Appropriations reports an original bill (S. 

3067) making appropriations for financial services and general government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2017, and for 

other purposes, reports favorably thereon without amendment and 

recommends that the bill do pass. 

Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 2017 

Total of bill as reported to the Senate .................... $44,361,260,000 

Amount of 2016 appropriations ............................... 44,830,934,000 

Amount of 2017 budget estimate ............................ 46,542,785,000 

Bill as recommended to Senate compared to— 

2016 appropriations .......................................... ¥469,674,000 

2017 budget estimate ........................................ ¥2,181,525,000 
(2) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Antideficiency Act Violations .................................................................................. 8 

Other Matters and Directives ................................................................................. 8 

Title I: Department of the Treasury: 

Departmental Offices ....................................................................................... 10 

Cybersecurity Enhancement Account ............................................................. 14 

Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments Programs .......................... 15 

Office of Inspector General ..................................................................................... 15 

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration ............................................ 17 

Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program ...................... 19 

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network ........................................................ 19 

Treasury Forfeiture Fund ................................................................................ 21 

Bureau of the Fiscal Service ............................................................................ 21 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau .................................................. 22 

Treasury Franchise Fund ................................................................................ 23 

United States Mint ........................................................................................... 23 

Community Development Financial Institutions Fund ................................. 24 

Bureau of Engraving and Printing ................................................................. 26 

Internal Revenue Service ................................................................................. 27 

Taxpayer Services ..................................................................................... 30 

Enforcement ............................................................................................... 35 

Operations Support ................................................................................... 39 

Business Systems Modernization ............................................................. 40 

Administrative Provisions—Internal Revenue Service .......................... 41 

Administrative Provisions—Department of the Treasury ............................. 42 

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

President: 

The White House .............................................................................................. 44 

Executive Residence at the White House ....................................................... 45 

White House Repair and Restoration ............................................................. 45 

Council of Economic Advisers .......................................................................... 45 

National Security Council and Homeland Security Council ......................... 46 

Office of Administration ................................................................................... 46 

Office of Management and Budget .................................................................. 47 

Office of National Drug Control Policy ........................................................... 49 

Federal Drug Control Programs: 

High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program .................................... 50 

Other Federal Drug Control Programs .................................................... 51 

Unanticipated Needs ........................................................................................ 52 

Presidential Transition Administrative Support ........................................... 52 

Information Technology Oversight and Reform ............................................. 52 

Special Assistance to the President ................................................................ 54 

Official Residence of the Vice President ......................................................... 54 

Administrative Provisions—Executive Office of the President and Funds 

Appropriated to the President ..................................................................... 55 

Title III: The Judiciary: 

Supreme Court of the United States .............................................................. 56 

Care of the Building and Grounds ........................................................... 57 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ............................... 57 
Page

3 

Title III—Continued 

United States Court of International Trade ................................................... 58 

Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services ................. 58 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund .............................................. 59 

Defender Services ...................................................................................... 59 

Fees of Jurors and Commissioners .......................................................... 60 

Court Security ........................................................................................... 60 

Administrative Office of the United States Courts ........................................ 61 

Federal Judicial Center .................................................................................... 62 

United States Sentencing Commission ........................................................... 62 

Administrative Provisions—The Judiciary ..................................................... 63 

Title IV—District of Columbia: 

Federal Payments: 

Federal Funds ............................................................................................ 64 

Federal Payment for Resident Tuition Support ...................................... 64 

Federal Payment for Emergency Planning and Security Costs in the 

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

Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Courts ............................ 66 

Federal Payment for Defender Services in District of Columbia 

Courts ..................................................................................................... 67 

Federal Payment to the Court Services and Offender Supervision 

Agency for the District of Columbia ..................................................... 67 

Federal Payment to the Public Defender Service for the District 

of Columbia ............................................................................................ 68 

Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority ..................................................................................................... 69 

Federal Payment to the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council .......... 69 

Federal Payment for Judicial Commissions ............................................ 70 

Federal Payment for School Improvement .............................................. 70 

Federal Payment for the D.C. National Guard ....................................... 71 

Federal Payment for HIV/AIDS Prevention ............................................ 71 

Federal Payment for Federal City Shelter .............................................. 71 

District of Columbia Funds ............................................................................. 72 

Title V—Independent Agencies: 

Administrative Conference of the United States ........................................... 74 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission ...................................................... 74 

Consumer Product Safety Commission ........................................................... 76 

Election Assistance Commission ..................................................................... 77 

Federal Communications Commission ............................................................ 78 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: Office of the Inspector General .... 82 

Federal Election Commission .......................................................................... 82 

Federal Labor Relations Authority ................................................................. 82 

Federal Trade Commission .............................................................................. 83 

General Services Administration .................................................................... 84 

Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation ...................................................... 91 

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

Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation ....................................... 92 

National Archives and Records Administration ............................................. 93 

National Credit Union Administration ........................................................... 97 

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

Office of Personnel Management ..................................................................... 98 

Office of Special Counsel .................................................................................. 102 

Postal Regulatory Commission ........................................................................ 103 

Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board ................................................. 103 

Securities and Exchange Commission ............................................................ 104 

Selective Service System .................................................................................. 105 

Small Business Administration ....................................................................... 106 

United States Postal Service ........................................................................... 114 

United States Tax Court .................................................................................. 115 

Statement Concerning General Provisions ............................................................ 116 

Title VI—General Provisions—This Act ................................................................ 117 

Title VII—General Provisions—Governmentwide ................................................ 120 

Title VIII—General Provisions—District of Columbia ......................................... 124 

Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of the 

Senate ................................................................................................................... 126 

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

Senate ................................................................................................................... 127 

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

Senate ................................................................................................................... 128 
Page

4 

Budgetary Impact of Bill ......................................................................................... 136 

Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority ............................................... 137 
(5) 

OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL 

The Financial Services and General Government appropriations 

bill provides funding for the Department of the Treasury, including 

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

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

independent Federal agencies. 

The Committee recommends $44,361,260,000 in discretionary 

and mandatory appropriations. This represents a decrease of 

$469,674,000 below the fiscal year 2016 enacted level, and a decrease of $2,181,525,000 below the budget request. Of the total, 

$22,551,810,000 is provided in discretionary appropriations, including $158,829,000 for the Small Business Administration Disaster 

Loans Program Account designated by Congress as disaster relief 

pursuant to Public Law 112–25. This discretionary amount is 

$2,205,525,000 below the budget request of $24,757,335,000. Mandatory appropriations less scorekeeping adjustments total 

$21,809,450,000. 

PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY 

During fiscal year 2017, for the purposes of the Balanced Budget 

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

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

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

Committees on Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports 

and joint explanatory statements of the committee of conference. 

REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES 

The Committee includes a provision (section 608) establishing 

the authority of agencies to reprogram funds and the limitation on 

that authority. The provision specifically requires the advance approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of 

any proposal to reprogram funds that: (1) creates a new program; 

(2) eliminates a program, project, or activity [PPA]; (3) increases 

funds or personnel for any PPA for which funds have been denied 

or restricted by the Congress; (4) proposes to redirect funds that 

were directed in such reports for a specific activity to a different 

purpose; (5) augments an existing PPA in excess of $5,000,000 or 

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

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

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

The Committee retains the requirement that each agency submit 

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

authorities provided in this act. Specifically, each agency should 

provide a table for each appropriation with columns displaying the 

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

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

The report must also identify items of special congressional interest. 

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

justification of increases and reductions and the specific impact the 

proposed changes will have on the budget request for the following 

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

The Committee expects each agency to manage its programs and 

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

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

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

notes that when a Department or agency submits a reprogramming 

or transfer request to the Committees on Appropriations and does 

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

is the responsibility of the Department or agency to reconcile the 

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

funds unapproved. 

RELATIONSHIP WITH BUDGET OFFICES 

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

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

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

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

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

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

the Committee insists on having direct, unobstructed, and timely 

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

The Committee expects timely agency compliance with mandated 

reporting requirements. The Committee directs all agencies from 

which reports are required to allow sufficient time to secure any 

necessary internal and external clearances of reports in order to 

satisfy congressional deadlines. The Committee strongly urges 
7 

agencies to alert the Committee as far as possible in advance of 

any expected slippage in meeting a report delivery due date. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS 

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

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

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

the format and presentation of budget materials is largely left to 

the agency within presentation objectives set forth by OMB. However, the Committee expects agencies to consult with the Committees on Appropriations in advance regarding any plans to modify 

the format of agency budget documents to ensure that the data 

needed to make appropriate and meaningful funding decisions is 

provided. 

The Committee directs that justifications submitted with the fiscal year 2018 budget requests by agencies funded under this act 

must contain the customary level of detailed data and explanatory 

statements to support the appropriations requests at the level of 

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

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

programs and comprehensive information on any office or agency 

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

projects, and activities that are proposed for fiscal year 2018 to the 

fiscal year 2017 enacted level. 

The Committee includes a general provision requiring that agencies provide, as a component incorporated within their fiscal year 

2018 budget justification materials submitted to the Committee, a 

separate table briefly describing the top management challenges 

for fiscal year 2017 as identified by the agency inspector general, 

along with an explanation of how the fiscal year 2018 budget request addresses each such management challenge. 

The Committee is aware that the analytical materials required 

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

Therefore, the Committee expects that each agency will coordinate 

with the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in advance on its planned presentation for its budget justification materials in support of the fiscal year 2018 budget request. 

AGENCY REPORTS 

As a measure to reduce costs and conserve paper, the Committee 

reminds agencies funded by this act that currently provide separate copies of periodic reports (such as Performance and Accountability Reports) and correspondence to the chairs of the House and 

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

members of the committees and subcommittees, to use a single 

cover letter jointly addressed to the chairs and ranking members 

of the Committee and subcommittee of both the House and the 
8 

Senate. To the greatest extent feasible, agencies should include in 

the cover letter a reference or hyperlink to facilitate electronic access to the report and provide the documents by electronic mail delivery. Consolidating addressees and remitting a copy of the letter 

and attachments to each recipient should expedite agency processing. This should also help ensure that consistent information is 

conveyed concurrently to the majority and minority committee offices of both chambers of Congress. 

ANTIDEFICIENCY ACT VIOLATIONS 

The Antideficiency Act is a cornerstone of Federal fiscal law. It 

forbids agencies from exceeding an appropriation, apportionment, 

or allotment; from obligating funds before Congress has appropriated them; and from accepting voluntary services or employing 

personal services exceeding that authorized by law. These prohibitions ensure that agencies operate within amounts that Congress 

has appropriated and, therefore, that agency activities are carried 

out in accordance with the will of the people as expressed through 

Congress. 

The Antideficiency Act requires agencies to immediately report 

violations of the act to Congress and to the President and to transmit a copy of each report to the Comptroller General. These reports 

must include all relevant facts pertaining to the violation and a 

statement of action taken. These reports provide information essential to the Committee as it performs oversight and as it considers 

agency funding levels. Therefore, the Committee directs any agency 

funded by this Act to concurrently transmit to the Subcommittee 

on Financial Services and General Government a copy of any 

Antideficiency Act violation report submitted pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 

1351 or 31 U.S.C. 1517(b). 

OTHER MATTERS AND DIRECTIVES 

Cybersecurity.—Cybersecurity remains one of the most significant challenges facing the Nation. Recent events have demonstrated that the Federal Government faces an array of cyberbased threats to its systems and data and the results have proven 

disastrous to millions of Americans. The Committee remains concerned that billions of Federal dollars are spent each fiscal year yet 

there is no guarantee of security for Americans. The Committee 

stresses the importance of the role of the Federal CIO in protecting 

Federal assets and information and strengthening the Federal Government’s overall cybersecurity infrastructure. The Committee is 

committed to conducting oversight of agencies within its jurisdiction to ensure that funding is being spent wisely and effectively 

while ensuring that stronger cyber controls are in place. The Committee encourages the Administration and agencies to enhance 

their cyber strategies and allocate resources accordingly to combat 

cybercrime and data breaches. 

Contracts and Awards.—Agencies funded by this act should require that all contracts within their purview that provide award 

fees link such fees to successful acquisition outcomes, specifying 

the terms of cost, schedule, and performance. Agencies funded by 

this act should not pay awards or incentive fees for contractor per-
9 

formance that has been judged to be below satisfactory performance or performance that does not meet the basic requirements of 

a contract. 

Advertising Transparency.—The Committee is aware that agencies funded through this bill do a variety of different types of advertising. The Committee directs the agencies to clearly state within the text, audio, or video used for advertising or education purposes, including emails or advertising/posting on the Internet, that 

the communications are printed, published or produced and disseminated at U.S. taxpayer expense. 
(10) 

TITLE I 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

DEPARTMENTAL OFFICES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $222,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 334,376,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 347,376,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Secretary of the Treasury has the primary role in formulating and managing the domestic and international tax and financial policies of the Federal Government. The Secretary’s responsibilities funded by the Departmental Offices Salaries and Expenses appropriation include: recommending and implementing 

U.S. domestic and international economic and tax policy; formulating fiscal policy; governing the fiscal operations of the Government; executing the Nation’s financial sanction policies; disrupting 

and dismantling terrorist financial infrastructure; protecting the 

United States and the international financial system from terrorist 

financing, money laundering, and other financial crimes; managing 

the public debt; managing international development policy; representing the United States on international monetary, trade, and 

investment issues; overseeing Department of the Treasury overseas 

operations; and directing the administrative operations of the Department of the Treasury. The majority of the Salaries and Expenses appropriation provides resources for policy formulation and 

implementation in the areas of domestic and international finance, 

terrorist financing and financial crimes, tax, economic, trade, financial operations and general fiscal policy. This appropriation also 

provides resources to support the Secretary, policy components, and 

departmental administrative policies in financial and personnel 

management, procurement operations, and information systems 

and telecommunications. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $347,376,000 for the Departmental 

Offices account of the Department of the Treasury for fiscal year 

2017. The funding recommendations are made based on information included in the budget justification. The Committee recommends $123,000,000 within the Departmental Offices account for the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence in order to support safeguarding financial systems 

against illicit use and combating rogue nations, terrorist 

facilitators, money launderers, proliferators of weapons of mass destruction, and other national security threats. 
11 

Student Debt.—The Committee notes that there is nearly $1,200,000,000,000 in outstanding student loan debt, of which 

$150,000,000,000 is in private student loans. More than 850,000 

students have defaulted on private student loans worth more than 

$8,100,000,000. The Committee commends the Federal bank regulators for efforts to encourage financial institutions to work constructively with private student loan borrowers experiencing financial difficulties and encourages Treasury to work with the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Office of the Comptroller of the 

Currency, the National Credit Union Administration, and the Federal Reserve to offer clear guidance that protects taxpayers and is 

consistent with safety and soundness principles recognizing the 

unique characteristics of private student loans compared to other 

debt and providing flexibility to lenders working with borrowers to 

avoid default. 

Office of Financial Education.—The Committee is concerned 

about the low level of financial literacy and numeracy skills among 

the adult population of the United States, as one in seven adults 

do not have the basic financial literacy skills to succeed in all but 

the most rudimentary financial literacy tasks. The Committee encourages the Department to explore the degree to which current 

Federal financial literacy programs benefit those individuals with 

less than basic literacy skills and to develop measurable goals and 

objectives for the Financial Literacy and Education Commission 

that address the needs of this population. Finally, the Committee 

urges the Department to explore opportunities to work with rural 

community-based adult and family literacy organizations to promote and implement future financial literacy initiatives. 

Wildlife Trafficking.—The Committee notes the recent increase of 

illegal trade in rhinoceros horns, elephant ivory, and illegally harvested timber, along with the large sums of money that these products command on the black market. There are indisputable linkages between these activities and the financing of armed 

insurgencies and groups that threaten the stability and development of African countries and pose a threat to U.S. security interests. The Committee directs the Department to use available resources to pursue and enforce money laundering and other related 

laws as related to wildlife trafficking and the illegal ivory trade. 

The Department shall report to the Committee semiannually during fiscal year 2017 on such enforcement actions and other steps 

taken to carry out the Implementation Plan of the National Strategy on Wildlife Trafficking during this fiscal year. 

Ivory Poaching.—Militias, armed groups, insurgents, and even 

terrorist groups are using profits from illegal ivory poaching and 

trafficking to further violence in Africa and elsewhere. Often the 

sales are to China and involve organized crime, shell companies, 

and arms traffickers. Accordingly, the Committee directs the Department of the Treasury to use available resources to pursue and 

enforce money laundering and other related laws as related to the 

illegal ivory trade, particularly in Africa. The Department shall report to the Committee every 6 months during the fiscal year on 

such enforcement actions taken during the fiscal year. 

Agricultural Exports.—The Committee notes that expanding export opportunities for U.S. agricultural producers remain a critical 
12 

opportunity for economic growth. U.S. agricultural sales restrictions to Cuba have prevented U.S. producers from unlocking their 

full market potential in Cuba. The Committee directs the Department of the Treasury to coordinate with the Department of Commerce and the Department of Agriculture to conduct an assessment 

of the impact that recent policy and regulatory changes to ease 

trade restrictions with Cuba have had on the U.S. agricultural industry and the extent to which remaining prohibitions on U.S. private financing or credit for sales of U.S. agricultural commodities 

negatively affects small U.S. exporters and farmers. The Department should report its findings to the Committee no later than 120 

days after enactment. 

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

to implement and enforce economic and trade sanctions consistent 

with national security and foreign policy goals. These sanctions are 

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

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

applicable to those supporting WMD proliferation, terrorism, 

transnational organized crime, the Islamic State of Iraq and the 

Levant, Russia, Belarus, North Korea, Iran, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, Zimbabwe and designated rebel groups operating in and 

around the Democratic Republic of Congo. The Committee directs 

the Department to promptly notify the Committee of any resource 

constraints that adversely impact the implementation of any sanctions program. 

Iran Sanctions.—The Committee directs the Treasury Department to conduct a full review of all sanction designation removals 

related to Iran during the past 2 years and report to the Committee in writing for each such removal whether the entity has engaged in any prohibited activities since the removal of sanctions. 

If Treasury determines an entity has engaged in any activities for 

which it should be sanctioned, Treasury shall either sanction the 

entity or provide a written justification for why sanctions have not 

been imposed. 

The Committee is deeply concerned that the number of new sanctions designations related to Iran’s non-nuclear activities has dramatically decreased over the past 2 years. The Committee directs 

the Treasury Department to provide a report to the Committee, 

within 180 days from enactment, on the number of non-nuclear related sanctions designations related to Iran issued for the each of 

the past 3 fiscal years. The report shall provide an overall number 

of designations, and the number for each sanctions program. 

The Committee is further concerned that investigations of entities for possible sanctions violations take considerable time and 

during the investigation period entities may continue to carry out 

sanctionable activities. The Committee directs the Department to 

begin tracking the time between the start of each investigation into 

possible sanctions violations and the issuance of sanctions or closure of the investigation. The Department shall provide a report to 

the Committee at the end of the fiscal year on the average inves-
13 

tigation time, the number of investigations carried out, the number 

of investigations concluded, and the number of open investigations. 

Management of Capital Investments.—The Committee notes that 

section 123 of the bill requires the Secretary of the Treasury to develop an annual Capital Investment Plan, to be submitted to the 

Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives within 30 days following submission of the President’s 

annual budget request. The Committee directs the Department to 

include estimated funding needs for the lifetime capital needs for 

each project, not just for the budget year. The Committee also directs the Department to include in the Capital Investment Plan 

meaningful and understandable summaries of capital investments 

by project type (e.g., information technology). The Committee directs the Office of the Chief Information Officer to ensure that adequate resources are devoted both to projects in the capital phase 

and to proper maintenance and modernization of existing systems 

and to ensure that all projects are tracked properly and described 

completely in the annual Capital Investment Plan. 

Cybersecurity.—The Committee supports investments in financial 

cybersecurity research, and strongly urges the Department of the 

Treasury, including the Office of Critical Infrastructure Policy, to 

work with the National Science Foundation, the Department of 

Homeland Security’s Science and Technology Directorate and its 

Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity, and others to leverage 

cybersecurity research and efforts to protect our Nation where it is 

most vulnerable. 

Mortgage Servicing Assets.—The Committee remains concerned 

that the risk-weighting requirements of and caps imposed under 

Basel III will have the practical impact of forcing small and midsize banks out of the mortgage servicing business with a serious 

impact on those banks as well as their customers. The Committee 

expects to receive the study on the appropriate capital requirements for mortgage servicing assets that was required in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 (Public Law 114–113) within 

the statutorily mandated deadline. 

Custody Banks.—The Financial Stability Oversight Council 

should examine regulatory approaches that may prevent custody 

banks from providing key services. For example, custody banks 

have a unique business model focused on providing services critical 

to the operation of mutual funds, pension funds, endowments and 

other institutional investors, including providing demand deposit 

accounts to hold these clients’ cash. By necessity, the custody 

banks place such cash on deposit with the Federal Reserve and 

other central banks, rather than investing in loans or other higher 

yielding assets. Current and future regulatory focus on this essentially risk-less activity, possibly impeding custody banks’ ability to 

provide traditional custody services, could have an adverse impact 

on financial stability by preventing custody banks from being able 

to accept cash deposits from their clients during a crisis, denying 

those clients a safe haven to preserve their capital and potentially 

worsening a run on the banking system. 

Guidelines for Pari-Mutuel Wagering.—The Committee appreciates the Department of the Treasury’s Proposed Rule (REG– 
14 

132253–11) being published on March 4, 2015, along with an associated public hearing being held on June 17, 2015. The Committee 

encourages the Treasury to expedite final consideration of the guidance which would modernize the rules governing pari-mutuel wagering. 

CYBERSECURTY ENHANCEMENT ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... $109,827,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 47,743,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Cybersecurity Enhancement Account [CEA] is a new dedicated account designed to bolster the Department’s cybersecurity 

posture and mitigate cybersecurity threats to the U.S. financial infrastructure. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $47,743,000 in Department-wide 

funding for focus on critical improvements to systems in the Treasury-wide budget activity identified in the congressional justification 

for this new account, including the Treasury Secure Data Network, 

the Fiscal Service Trusted Internet Connections, and the other systems that have been identified as High Values Assets. The funding 

will also support identification and protection of information systems; detection of threat actors; and response and recovery from 

cyber incidents. A portion of the resources will also support a dedicated innovation fund for evolving high impact cyber investments 

throughout the Department. 

Treasury Chief Information Officer Oversight.—Cybersecurity remains one of the most significant challenges facing the Nation. Recent events have demonstrated that the Federal Government faces 

as array of cyber-based threats to its systems and data and the results have proven disastrous to millions of Americans. The Committee directs the Treasury CIO to review and approve each investment under the Cyber Security Enhancement Account and report 

to the Committees on Appropriations of the House and the Senate 

each quarter on the progress of each investment. In order to help 

ensure that the Treasury CIO retains control over the execution of 

these funds, the Committee recommendation does not permit transfers of funds from the Cybersecurity Enhancement Account and 

does not adopt the language in the request allowing these funds to 

be obligated and expended through allocation accounts available to 

individual offices and bureaus. 

Spend Plans.—To improve oversight of these funds across the 

Department, the Committee directs the CIOs of each office and bureau of the Treasury to submit a spend plan for each prospective 

investment under this heading to the Treasury Department CIO 

for review. The Committee directs the Treasury CIO to review each 

investment submitted under the Cyber Security Enhancement Account heading to improve oversight of these funds across the Department; none of the funds under this heading will be available 
15 

to fund such an investment without the approval of the Treasury 

CIO. 

The Spend Plans should include how the investment will: enhance Department-wide coordination of cybersecurity efforts and 

improve the Department’s responsiveness to cybersecurity threats; 

provide bureau and agency leadership with greater visibility into 

cybersecurity efforts and further encourage information sharing 

across bureaus; improve identification of cyber threats and better 

protect information systems from attack; provide a platform to enhance efficient communication, collaboration, and transparency 

around the common goal of improving not only the cybersecurity of 

the Treasury Department, but also the Nation’s financial sector. 

The spend plans should also detail the type of cybersecurity enhancement the investment represents, and the cost, scope, schedule 

of the investment, and explain how it complements existing cyber 

efforts. 

DEPARTMENT-WIDE SYSTEMS AND CAPITAL INVESTMENTS PROGRAMS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $5,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The 1997 Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act 

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

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

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for Department-wide 

Systems and Capital Investments Programs [DSCIP] for fiscal year 

2017. 

The Committee notes that the DSCIP account has been utilized 

to fund a wide variety of multiyear initiatives. Given the complexity of these initiatives, the bill includes language in section 123 

directing the Department of the Treasury to submit an annual 

Capital Investment Plan to the Committees on Appropriations 

within 30 days after the President’s budget submission. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $35,416,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 37,044,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 37,044,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

As a result of the 1988 amendments to the Inspector General 

Act, the Secretary of the Treasury established the Office of Inspector General [OIG] in 1989. 
16 

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

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

function provides program audit, contract audit, and financial 

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

settlement of contracts. Program audits review and audit all facets 

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

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

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

managers identify improvements needed in their accounting and 

internal control systems. The evaluations function reviews program 

performance and issues critical to the mission of the Department. 

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $37,044,000 for salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General. This amount is equal to 

the budget request and $1,628,000 above the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. 

The Committee directs the Inspector General to utilize funds provided to meet mandated audit requirements such as information 

security in addition to other prioritized work including Treasury’s 

responsibilities as they relate to the implementation of anti-money 

laundering programs and the Community Development Financial 

Institutions Fund. 

The Committee remains concerned about cyber-based threats and 

recent data breaches at Federal agencies. The Committee encourages the Inspector General to conduct oversight work on the potential vulnerability of Treasury’s networks and systems including its 

physical security, continuous monitoring, and strong authentication. 

As outlined in the Inspector General’s recent audit plan, the 

Committee looks forward to reviewing work on the CDFI Fund’s 

overall administration of grants awarded under the core program. 

Specifically, the Committee hopes to learn more about whether 

funds are awarded to eligible recipients in accordance with applicable laws and regulations; whether the CDFI Fund has established 

and maintained internal control procedures and oversight over 

grants; and whether there is a process for measuring outcomes to 

ensure program objectives are achieved. 

Treatment of Employees of the Former Financial Management 

Service.—The Committee instructs the Office of Inspector General 

[OIG] to continue monitoring the treatment of the employees of the 

Bureau of the Fiscal Service who were employees of the former Financial Management Service before the bureau was consolidated. 
17 

The Committee remains concerned regarding employees being 

threatened or harassed, demoted, or pushed out of service through 

poor treatment by the Treasury Department. 

TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $167,275,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 169,634,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 169,634,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration [TIGTA] 

was established by the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 

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

audit and investigative services necessary to improve the quality 

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

and ensure that the IRS is held to a high level of accountability. 

TIGTA conducts audits, investigations, and inspections and evaluations to assess the operations and programs of the IRS and related entities, the IRS Oversight Board and the Office of Chief 

Counsel to (1) promote the economic, efficient, and effective administration of the Nation’s tax laws and to detect and deter fraud and 

abuse in IRS programs and operations; and (2) recommend actions 

to resolve fraud and other serious problems, abuses, and deficiencies in these programs and operations, and keep the Secretary 

and Congress fully and currently informed of these issues and the 

progress made in resolving them. 

The audit function provides program audit, limited contract 

audit, and financial audit services. Program audits review and 

audit all facets of the IRS and related entities in an effort to improve IRS systems and operations, while ensuring fair and equitable treatment of taxpayers. Contract audits focus on invoices/ 

vouchers submitted to the IRS to determine whether charges are 

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

and protects the IRS and related entities against external attempts 

to corrupt or threaten the administration of the tax laws. 

During fiscal year 2015, TIGTA recovered, protected, and identi- fied monetary benefits totaling $26,500,000,000, including 

$17,400,000,000 in potential increased and protected revenue and 

$9,100,000,000 in potential cost savings. In fiscal year 2015, TIGTA 

received 12,080 complaints, opened 2,726 investigations, and closed 

2,797 investigations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $169,634,000 for TIGTA. This amount is $2,359,000 above the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and the same as the budget request. The Committee 

recognizes the expansive workload that TIGTA has assumed as 

well as considerable demands on its resources in order to be responsive to Congress. The Committee acknowledges the challenges 

TIGTA faces in adapting its oversight activities to address increas-
18 

ingly complex and high-risk issues associated with IRS operations, 

including protecting sensitive taxpayer data, detection and investigation of fraud and electronic crime, impersonation scams, and review of procurement activities. The Committee recognizes that 

growth in the size and workload of the IRS generates concomitant 

increased work for TIGTA. 

Since fiscal year 2011, TIGTA has designated the security of taxpayer data as the top concern facing the IRS based on the increased number and sophistication of threats to taxpayer information and the need for the IRS to better protect taxpayer data and 

improve its enterprise security program. The Committee appreciates the work TIGTA has performed on IRS’s efforts to detect refund fraud by identity thieves and authenticate individual taxpayers’ identities at the time tax returns are filed. In a report 

issued in November 2015, TIGTA found that when the IRS assessed the risk of the Get Transcript application, it rated the authentication risk associated with Get Transcript as low to both the 

IRS and taxpayers. As a result, the IRS implemented single-factor 

authentication to access the Get Transcript application. TIGTA also 

reported that the IRS did not complete the required authentication 

risk assessment of the Identity Protection Personal Identification 

Number. TIGTA’s findings revealed additional attempts to clear 

the Get Transcript verification process and ultimately led to the 

IRS disabling these applications. The Committee remains concerned about IRS’s implementation of its Future State vision and 

IRS’s ability to implement the necessary security controls in its 

rush to make available electronic applications. The Committee appreciates TIGTA’s work in this area and looks forward to reviewing 

TIGTA’s work on evaluating the changes being considered for authenticating taxpayer access to their account information, particularly as the IRS re-launches Get Transcript and other electronic 

applications; the effectiveness of controls to mitigate threats to IRS 

systems; the security of data file transfers to third parties; and the 

effectiveness of controls to address cybersecurity incidents. 

The Committee relies on TIGTA’s annual assessment of the serious management challenges facing the IRS as it evaluates resource 

needs. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 provided the 

IRS with additional funding for customer service. The Committee 

looks forward to reviewing TIGTA’s work on assessing IRS’s process for allocating its customer service budget. The Committee appreciates the work TIGTA has completed on emerging issues in 

particular the IRS impersonation scams. The Committee understands that TIGTA has declared the scam the most pervasive in 

the history of the agency. The scam has affected thousands of victims in every state represented on the Committee with reported 

losses totaling close to $36,500,000. The Committee is pleased to 

hear that TIGTA has made significant progress in its investigation 

of the IRS impersonation scam. The Committee urges TIGTA to 

continue to assist the IRS in improving its arsenal of tools to better 

serve innocent taxpayer victims of identity theft and other 

schemes. 

The IRS’s use of inappropriate criteria for selecting and reviewing applications for tax-exempt status is of continuing concern to 

both Congress and organizations seeking tax-exempt status. TIGTA 
19 

recently reported that the IRS has taken actions to eliminate the 

selection of potential political cases based on names and policy positions, expedite processing of I.R.C. section 501(c)(4) social welfare 

organization applications, and eliminate unnecessary information 

requests. As part of its review, TIGTA recommended that the IRS 

take action to improve the timing and execution of political campaign intervention training for relevant employees. The Committee 

appreciates TIGTA’s diligent work on this important matter to ensure that applications for tax-exempt status are processed in a fair, 

impartial, and timely manner. 

The Committee appreciates TIGTA’s monitoring of the IRS’s implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

[ACA]. The ACA impacts individual and business taxpayers at all 

income levels, IRS compliance and enforcement programs, information reporting requirements, the administration of tax penalties, 

and information technology. The IRS’s ability to ensure accurate 

tax returns are filed and information reported is correct is dependent on the timely receipt of information from exchanges, insurance 

providers, and employers. TIGTA has issued numerous reports related to the IRS’s efforts to implement the Affordable Care Act tax 

provisions. The Committee looks forward to reviewing TIGTA’s 

work on the effectiveness of the IRS’s verification of employers’ and 

individuals’ compliance with minimum essential coverage requirements and IRS’s efforts to improve the verification of Premium Tax 

Credit claims. 

SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR THE TROUBLED ASSET RELIEF

PROGRAM

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $40,671,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 41,160,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 41,160,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $41,160,000 for the SIGTARP for 

fiscal year 2017. The recommendation is $489,000 above the fiscal 

year 2016 enacted level and equal to the budget request. 

FINANCIAL CRIMES ENFORCEMENT NETWORK

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $112,979,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 115,003,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 114,479,000 
20 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN], a bureau 

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

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

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

laundering/counterterrorist financing regulatory regime. As the delegated administrator of the Bank Secrecy Act, FinCEN is responsible for the development and implementation of regulations, rules, 

and guidance issued under the Bank Secrecy Act. FinCEN also 

oversees the work of eight Federal agencies with delegated responsibility to examine various sectors of the financial industry for compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act’s requirements. FinCEN is responsible for collecting, maintaining, and disseminating the information reported by financial institutions under the Bank Secrecy 

Act through a Governmentwide access service. FinCEN is the 

United States’ Financial Intelligence Unit [FIU] and a founding 

member of the Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units. As 

the United States’ FIU, FinCEN routinely shares information and 

cooperates with other FIUs around the world to address the global 

problems of terrorist financing, money laundering, and other illicit 

activity. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $114,479,000 for the Financial 

Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN]. The amount is $1,500,000 

above the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The Committee’s recommended funding is intended to sustain increased national security response capacity for FinCEN’s intelligence analysis and reporting efforts to combat terrorist groups. 

The recommended funding will also support several key FinCEN 

budget priorities, including targeting examination and enforcement 

efforts to high priority areas; expanding understanding and analysis of illicit networks, institutions, jurisdictions, and schemes, 

with emphasis on national security threats and terrorist groups; 

ensuring the Bank Secrecy Act regulatory structure effectively and 

efficiently targets illicit financing risks; managing the efficient collection, processing, and retrieval of Bank Secrecy Act data; and fostering strong public-private partnerships with the financial industry. 

Money Laundering of Cybercrime Proceeds.—The Committee recognizes that major data security breaches are becoming more common and are often orchestrated by sophisticated cybercriminal enterprises that then monetize the data and launder it through U.S. 

financial institutions. The Committee notes FinCEN’s history of 

supporting law enforcement cases that combat cybercrime, and emphasizes the importance of continuing this effort as part of the bureau’s broader mission to detect and disrupt all forms of financial 

crime. In addition to analyzing financial flows for this important effort in the course of ongoing strategic operations, FinCEN shall use 
21 

this data to ensure reporting institutions remain vigilant in detecting the laundering of cybercriminal proceeds by issuing an advisory 

to financial institutions on filing suspicious activity reports [SARs] 

regarding specific cybercriminal activities. The advisory should provide SAR filers a list of trends, typologies, and red flag indicators 

that may potentially signal cybercrime to be included in the narratives of relevant SAR filings. 

TREASURY FORFEITURE FUND

(RESCISSION)

The Committee recommends a rescission of $657,000,000 of unobligated balances in the Treasury Forfeiture Fund, of which 

$328,000,000 are permanently rescinded. 

BUREAU OF THE FISCAL SERVICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $363,850,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 353,057,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 353,057,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The mission of the Fiscal Service is to promote the financial integrity and operational efficiency of the U.S. Government through 

accounting, borrowing, collections, payments, and shared services. 

The Fiscal Service provides central payment services to Federal 

agencies and operates the Federal Government’s collections and deposit systems in addition to providing Governmentwide accounting 

and reporting services, managing the collection of delinquent debt 

owed to the Federal Government, borrowing on behalf of the Federal Government, and providing support services for other Federal 

agencies on a reimbursable basis. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $353,057,000 for the Bureau of the 

Fiscal Service. This amount is equal to the budget request and 

$10,793,000 below the enacted level due to one-time costs in fiscal 

year 2016 to support costs associated with the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 [DATA Act]. The fiscal year 

2016 DATA Act funds will remain available until fiscal year 2018 

to support its implementation. 

The Committee supports the Fiscal Service’s goal of improving 

governmentwide financial management through transparency and 

accountability. The Committee provides funding for activities associated with maintaining consistent, reliable, and searchable governmentwide spending data on USASpending.gov. 

DATA Act.—The Committee is aware of the Department of the 

Treasury’s leadership role in implementing the DATA Act to date. 

The Department is directed to implement the law in a manner consistent with both statutory deadlines and the timelines indicated in 

the DATA Act Playbook, including by providing timely technical assistance to agencies. 
22 

Consolidation Plan.—The Committee acknowledges that the consolidation of the Bureau of the Public Debt and Financial Management Service into the new Bureau of the Fiscal Service has left 

some employees with uncertainty over their future, creating anxiety and low employee morale. The Committee directs the Bureau 

of the Fiscal Service to release a comprehensive consolidation plan, 

including the job functions that will be maintained at each location, 

within 180 days of enactment. 

ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO TAX AND TRADE BUREAU

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $106,439,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 106,439,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 111,439,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau [TTB] is charged 

with collecting revenue and protecting the public and is responsible 

for enforcement of certain Federal laws and regulations relating to 

alcohol and tobacco. TTB works directly and in cooperation with 

others to maintain a sound revenue management and collection 

system that continues to reduce the regulatory burden, improve 

service, collect the revenue due, and prevent tax evasion and other 

criminal conduct. TTB is also responsible for preventing consumer 

deception, ensuring that regulated products comply with Federal 

commodity, safety, and distribution requirements, and providing 

customer service. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $111,439,000 for TTB for fiscal year 

2017. The Committee recognizes that TTB is tasked to enforce alcohol, tobacco, and firearms provisions in the Internal Revenue Code 

[IRC]. Within funds appropriated to the Department of the Treasury, the Committee urges the Secretary to prioritize alcohol and tobacco criminal enforcement by providing sufficient resources to 

TTB to combat tax evasion and enforce existing anti-illicit tobacco 

laws. 

Labeling Program.—The surge of small brewers and wine makers 

emerging in the domestic market has also meant a rapid annual 

growth in the number of alcohol beverage label applications submitted to the TTB. In recent years, understaffing and outdated filing and processing procedures in the Bureau’s labeling program 

caused significant delays in application approvals. These delays ultimately affected the ability of the applicants to get their product 

to the market in a timely manner. The Committee encourages the 

Bureau to make strategic investments that will further streamline 

the approval process to keep up with the volume of label applications and reduce delays. 

Trade Practice Enforcement.—The Committee has included an 

additional $5,000,000 for TTB to increase education and enforcement efforts for industry trade practices. The Committee is concerned by the loss of efforts to enforce the basic trade practice functions required under the Federal Alcohol Administration Act [FAA 
23 

Act] and has directed additional funding to the agency for enforcement of the regulations under the FAA Act. These regulations protect the production, distribution, and sale of beverage alcohol which 

maintains an orderly and safe marketplace for the American consumer. The Committee directs the TTB to report to the Committees 

on Appropriations of the House and Senate, within 60 days of enactment of this act, on how the additional funding will be used to 

create greater awareness and enforcement in responding to the 

growing demand from stakeholders. 

Wine Label Accuracy.—The Committee is aware that the Alcohol 

and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau is working to ensure that wine 

labels accurately reflect the use of American Viticulture Area 

terms. The Committee directs the Department to publish rulemaking addressing this issue without delay. 

TREASURY FRANCHISE FUND

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... $3,000,000 

Committee Recommendation ................................................................ ........................... 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Treasury Franchise Fund is revolving in nature and provides 

accounting, procurement, travel, human resources, and information 

technology services through its three business lines: the Administrative Resource Center [ARC], Fiscal IT, and the Shared Services 

Program [SSP]. Services are provided to Federal customers on a reimbursable, fee-for-service basis. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee bill does not include funding for DATA Act implementation expenses that can be supported by the fund. 

UNITED STATES MINT

UNITED STATES MINT PUBLIC ENTERPRISE FUND

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Mint manufactures coins, sells numismatic 

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

the Numismatic Public Enterprise Fund. The Mint submits annual 

audited business-type financial statements to the Secretary of the 

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

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

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

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

circulation, including depreciation of the Mint’s plant and equipment on the basis of current replacement value. Those receipts pay 
24 

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

production and distribution. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

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

circulating coinage and protective service capital investments for 

the Mint. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FUND

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FUND PROGRAM

ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $233,523,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 245,923,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 233,523,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund makes 

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

program. CDFIs include community development banks, credit 

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

funds, among others. Recipient institutions engage in lending and 

investment for affordable housing, small business, and community 

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $233,523,000 for the CDFI Fund. Of 

the amounts provided, $171,423,000 is for financial and technical 

assistance grants, $15,500,000 is for Native Initiatives, $23,000,000 

is for the Bank Enterprise Award Program, and $23,600,000 is for 

the administrative expenses for all programs. 

The Committee notes the CDFI Fund’s ability to leverage private 

sector investment in community development projects such as affordable housing, retail development, and community centers, as 

well as lending to small businesses. However, the Committee remains concerned about an overall lack of transparency into many 

of the CDFI Fund’s programs and nominal ability to verify investment impacts. The Committee is also concerned by reports that 

award recipients are infrequently held accountable for award usage 

that differs from its original location and purpose, as set forth by 

the recipient’s approved application. The Committee strongly believes it is important to ensure that CDFIs are delivering investments to the borrowers and communities that need it most. It remains difficult to determine whether program goals are being 

achieved. The Committee provides $1,000,000 for the development 

of tools to better measure and assess CDFI investment performance, improve data quality, and enable more efficient allocation of 

CDFI Fund resources. 
25 

The Committee expects to know how program funding generates 

meaningful community impacts. The Committee recognizes the 

CDFI Fund’s recent efforts to establish common definitions around 

key impact measurements and encourages the Fund to continue its 

work in this area as well as on improving the quality and consistency of feedback from awardees. The Committee directs the Secretary to report to the Appropriations Committees within 90 days 

of enactment detailing the Fund’s efforts to better collect and 

evaluate performance-related data, to better gauge the effectiveness of its efforts in underserved populations, including rural and 

non-metropolitan communities, and to better inform future decision-making. 

Core Program.—The Committee recommends $171,423,000 for 

the CDFI Fund to carry out its financial assistance and technical 

assistance programs, including the Healthy Food Financing Initiative. The Committee believes that applicants for CDFI awards 

should receive fair and equal consideration, consistent with section 

102 of the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994 (Public Law 103–325), including financial 

and technical assistance for lending and investment in small businesses, affordable housing, community development, and efforts to 

increase the availability of affordable, healthy foods in underserved 

communities. The core CDFI Program should be the source of 

awards allocations for these purposes. The Committee looks forward to reviewing work from the Inspector General on the CDFI 

Fund’s overall administration of grants awarded under the core 

program. Specifically, the Committee hopes to learn more about 

whether funds are awarded to eligible recipients in accordance with 

applicable laws and regulations; whether the CDFI Fund has established and maintained internal control procedures and oversight 

over grants; and whether there is a process for measuring outcomes 

to ensure program objectives are achieved. 

Bank Enterprise Award Program.—The Committee recommends 

$23,000,000 for the Bank Enterprise Award [BEA] Program to increase lending, investment, and service activities within economically distressed communities. This program plays an important role 

in providing financial services to underserved communities across 

the country. 

Native Programs.—The Committee recommends $15,500,000 for 

grants, loans, and technical assistance and training programs to 

benefit Native American, Alaskan Natives, and Native Hawaiian 

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

Non-Metropolitan and Rural Areas.—The Committee directs 

Treasury to take into consideration the unique conditions, challenges, and scale of non-metropolitan areas when designing programs to address economic revitalization and community development and when making CDFI award decisions. The Committee 

notes that the CDFI Fund is required by 12 U.S.C. 4706(b) to seek 

to fund a geographically diverse group of award recipients, including those from non-metropolitan and rural areas. In addition, the 

Committee directs funding to be used in each program for projects 
26 

that serve populations living in persistent poverty counties in accordance with this act. 

Bond Guarantee Program.—The Committee includes a provision 

enabling the Secretary of the Treasury to guarantee up to 

$500,000,000 in bonds in fiscal year 2017, as authorized by section 

1134 of the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Public Law 111–240). 

The bond guarantees will not result in a cost to the taxpayer. The 

bonds are intended to support CDFI lending and investment activities in underserved communities by providing a source of long-term 

capital, and the funds raised through the bonds will be used to capitalize new loans or refinance existing loans. 

BUREAU OF ENGRAVING AND PRINTING

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

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

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

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

the cornerstone authority for the operations of the engraving and 

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

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

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

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

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

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

303. 

The BEP designs, manufactures, and supplies Federal Reserve 

notes and other security documents issued by the Federal Government. The operations of the BEP are currently financed by means 

of a revolving fund established in accordance with the provisions 

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

the BEP to be reimbursed by customer agencies for all costs of 

manufacturing products and services performed. The BEP is also 

authorized to assess amounts to acquire capital equipment and provide for working capital needs. No direct appropriation is required 

to cover the activities of the BEP. 

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing [BEP] prints billions of 

Federal Reserve notes each year at its production facilities in 

Washington, DC and Fort Worth, Texas. The Committee recognizes 

that the age and structural design of the Washington, DC facility 

causes production inefficiencies and limits the options available to 

the BEP in acquiring and installing new manufacturing equipment 

needed to print the next generation of currency. The Committee directs the BEP, in consultation with the General Services Administration, to submit to the Committee, within 180 days of the date 

of enactment of this act, a report on the feasibility of constructing 

a smaller, more efficient and flexible production facility in the National Capital Region to replace its current DC facility. The report 

should include an explanation of the operational and security bene-
27 

fits of a new production facility and the anticipated costs and construction schedule. 

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

laws and collects the revenue that funds more than 92 percent of 

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

mission is to provide taxpayers with quality service by helping 

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

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

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

IRS employees deal directly with more American taxpayers than 

any other institution, public or private. 

Unfortunately, the IRS does not seem to have its priorities in 

order. The Committee remains concerned about IRS’s Future State 

vision where taxpayers will rely on online services for their IRS 

interactions. According to the National Taxpayer Advocate, the vision essentially eliminates IRS-taxpayer personal interaction with 

online and third-party interactions except in the context of enforcement actions. What is lost in this vision of the future is the interest 

and relationship with actual taxpayers. While some evolution in 

service delivery can be expected, it is the IRS’s ability to manage 

that change without adversely impacting taxpayers that is most 

worrisome. This is of particular concern given the recent revelation 

that in the rush to expand online services, the IRS made fundamental mistakes in assessing risks to its online systems which resulted in over 700,000 taxpayers being exposed to the potential of 

identity theft and refund fraud, many more than were first reported by the IRS. 

The IRS continues to ignore the impact of its own behavior on 

the attitudes of taxpayers. When the IRS takes actions that represent a serious breach of the trust of the American people, it undermines taxpayers’ faith in the impartiality of the agency. The 

self-inflicted damage harms the very credibility that is essential for 

our voluntary compliance system to function. Americans have lost 

faith in the institution and it is incumbent upon the agency to regain the trust of the taxpayers. 

Unfortunately there continues to be evidence of a culture that is 

simply out of touch with taxpayers and their concerns. When the 

IRS singles out certain groups for disparate treatment it should not 

be surprised by the lasting impact such actions have on taxpayer 

attitudes. When the IRS hires employees with past performance or 

conduct issues, it does nothing to maintain the public trust in tax 

administration or build confidence in the IRS’s ability to safeguard 

taxpayer’s rights and privacy. 

Making employee bonuses a priority does not help the IRS regain 

the trust of taxpayers or raise confidence that the agency will enforce tax laws impartially, without regard to an individual’s exercise of their constitutional rights. As was the case in the previous 

fiscal year, in 2016 one of the IRS’s first actions after the enact-
28 

ment of their appropriations bill was to announce they would pay 

out $51,000,000 in awards to employees. 

Once again, the IRS management seems to have forgotten that 

their most important customers aren’t their own employees. They 

are the American people. This is particularly evident with respect 

to taxpayer services. The Committee is concerned about the IRS’s 

willingness to cut services to taxpayers in an effort to garner support for increased resources. The Committee notes that given specific direction and a requirement from Congress to the IRS in fiscal 

year 2016, the IRS has taken steps to improve taxpayer services. 

Unfortunately, without this specific direction, the IRS would not 

have made taxpayer services a priority. The Committee provides 

the IRS with funds through four appropriations. While some funds 

are designated for some specific taxpayer assistance programs 

within those amounts, the IRS has significant discretion as to how 

to apportion its funds to meet agency requirements. In addition, in 

fiscal year 2016 the IRS had over $1,000,000,000 available in additional resources, including over $500,000,000 in user fees to supplement its appropriation. The IRS expects to collect $400,000,000 in 

user fees in fiscal year 2017, over half of which it plans to use to 

supplement its operations support account. 

Unfortunately, the IRS continues to take actions that demonstrate its inability to be transparent about its available resources 

and flexibility. Just recently the IRS announced its intent to hire 

600 to 700 enforcement officers. In a memo to employees the IRS 

Commissioner stated that the IRS’s budget is allocated to four specific areas and when funding is available in one area the IRS is required to spend it in that area. The Commissioner is well aware 

of the transfer and reprogramming authority provided by Congress, 

yet failed to omit this fact in his statement to employees. 

The Committee continues to be concerned with the IRS’s role in 

the implementation of ACA. IRS has stated that the tax provisions 

of ACA are a core activity, like all other tax administration. However, concerns have been raised about potential fraudulent claims 

related to premium tax credits and the security of Federal tax data 

as the IRS provides data to health exchanges. According to the 

Government Accountability Office [GAO], from 2010 to 2015, the 

IRS has already spent $1,600,000,000 on implementation of ACA. 

More troubling is the fact that the IRS is requesting $402,400,000 

for ACA, almost double the amount ($204,600,000) spent in fiscal 

year 2016. The IRS continues to make ACA a priority by dedicating 

a large share of user fees to support ACA implementation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total of $11,235,000,000 for the 

Internal Revenue Service for fiscal year 2017, equivalent to the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The Committee continues prior language requiring $290,000,000 be used for measurable improvements to taxpayer services, cybersecurity, and the resolution of 

identity theft cases. 

Future State Vision.—IRS’s future state vision of the tax administration system is to promote and improve voluntary compliance 

by delivering better service to more people at a lower cost through 

less IRS-taxpayer personal interaction and greater online and 
29 

third-party interactions. According to the Commissioner, ‘‘when it 

costs between $40 and $60 to interact with a taxpayer in person, 

and less than $1 to interact online, we must reexamine how to best 

provide the best possible taxpayer experience, in response to taxpayer expectations and demands.’’ Security concerns aside the IRS 

has not demonstrated that is has analyzed the consequences of its 

vision and the impact it will have on taxpayers. Additionally, it is 

unclear what research IRS conducted to understand taxpayer 

needs. According to the National Taxpayer Advocate, gradual automation actually has resulted in increased demand for person-toperson service. 

User Fees.—Numerous user fees are collected by the IRS for services provided by the IRS to taxpayers. Specifically, IRS charges 

user fees for various activities that include assisting taxpayers in 

complying with their tax liabilities, clarifying the application of the 

tax code to particular circumstances, and ensuring the quality of 

paid preparers of tax returns, among others. Those fees are available for use by the IRS at the discretion of the Commissioner. According to the IRS, it determines the use of user fees based on 

agency-wide requirements given the total IRS funding availability. 

In fiscal year 2015, transfers of user fees ($454,000,000) accounted 

for 3.8 percent of total available resources ($11,976,000,000). IRS 

carried over an unobligated balance of $194,000,000 in user fees 

from fiscal year 2015 available for obligation in fiscal year 2016. 

Despite the flexibility IRS has in allocating fees, from fiscal years 

2014 to 2015, IRS increased transfers to Operations Support by 

$171,000,000, and decreased transfers to Taxpayer Services by 

$139,000,000. In its fiscal year 2017 budget request, IRS estimates 

user fees of $400,000,000 will supplement its fiscal 2017 funding. 

As evidence of its priorities, in fiscal year 2016 the IRS anticipates 

spending more than half of its user fees on ACA information technology needs. The Committee directs IRS to submit a user fee 

spending plan within 60 days of enactment detailing planned 

spending on its four appropriations accounts—Taxpayer Services, 

Enforcement, Operations Support, and Business Modernization 

Systems. Specifically, the Committee would like to see how programs, investments, and initiatives funded through each appropriations account are supported by user fees. 

Cybersecurity.—The IRS is responsible for safeguarding a vast 

amount of sensitive financial and personal data, processing returns 

that contain confidential information for over 100 million taxpayers. Persistent information security weaknesses put the IRS at 

risk of disruption, fraud, or inappropriate disclosure of sensitive information. GAO recently reported that IRS had not always effectively implemented access and other controls, including elements of 

its information security program, to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of its financial systems and information. 

These weaknesses, some of which were recently identified increase 

the risk that taxpayer and other sensitive information could be disclosure or modified without authorization. Given the recent 

breaches to taxpayer data, it is clear IRS cannot afford to have taxpayer information misused, improperly disclosed, or destroyed. Securing IRS’s systems and protecting taxpayers’ information should 

be a top priority for IRS. 
30 

Employee Performance and Conduct.—The Committee continues 

past language acknowledging that the IRS must ensure that its 

employees comply with the tax law in order to maintain the 

public’s confidence. The Committee is deeply concerned about employees who fail to file taxes in a timely manner and claim tax 

credits for which they are ineligible. The Committee agrees with 

TIGTA that rehiring employees with known conduct and performance issues presents increased risks to the IRS and taxpayers. The 

Committee notes H.R. 3724 was introduced to prohibit the IRS 

from rehiring employees who were previously fired for misconduct 

or job performance-related issues. 

Budget Presentation for Staffing of New Initiatives.—The Committee strongly believes that transparency in the budget request 

documents is critical for congressional oversight and informed decisionmaking. The Committee directs that the justification materials 

submitted by the IRS to the Committee for fiscal year 2018 should 

accurately reflect the anticipated hiring dates for staff identified for 

proposed new initiatives. The Committee expects that resources 

designated for hiring of staff for new initiatives be predicated on 

the expected hiring dates, and not assume that such planned hiring 

will occur on one particular date during the fiscal year. The Office 

of Management and Budget Circular A–11 suggests agencies consider delays in recruiting and hiring when budgeting for staff. 

TAXPAYER SERVICES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $2,156,554,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 2,406,318,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,156,554,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

related documents; filing and account services; taxpayer advocacy 

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

manner. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $2,156,554,000 for Taxpayer Services. Bill language is included providing not less than $8,000,000 

for the tax counseling for the elderly program, not less than 

$12,000,000 for low-income taxpayer clinic [LITC] grants, not less 

than $15,000,000, to be available for 2 years, for a community volunteer income tax assistance [VITA] matching grant program for 

tax return preparation assistance and $206,000,000 for the Taxpayer Advocate Service of which $5,000,000 shall be devoted to assisting taxpayers impacted by tax-related identity theft and refund 

fraud. 

Providing quality taxpayer service is a critical component of the 

IRS’s efforts to help the taxpaying public understand their tax obligation while making it easier to participate in the tax system. The 

Committee notes that the IRS has flexibility in how it allocates 

user fees as well as transfer authority among appropriations ac-
31 

counts. In fiscal year 2015, the IRS allocated fewer user fees to 

Taxpayer Services, representing about a 75 percent decline from 

fiscal year 2014, while increasing user fees to its Enforcement and 

Operations Support accounts. The Consolidated Appropriations Act 

of 2016 provided an additional $290,000,000 to the IRS appropriations accounts, of which the IRS spent $178,422,000 to improve the 

customer service representative level of service rate from the Taxpayer Services and Operations Support accounts. The Committee 

encourages the IRS to use resources available through user fee revenues to augment the direct discretionary appropriation for Taxpayer Services to enhance filing and account services to taxpayers 

and resolution of identity theft cases. 

Future State Vision.—As part of the IRS’s Future State vision, 

taxpayers will have a variety of service options with an emphasis 

on online tools and support, and will be able to obtain service when 

and where they want it. According to the Taxpayer Assistance 

Blueprint, taxpayers generally prefer self-assisted services, such as 

those found on the IRS Web site, for tasks like getting a form or 

a publication or getting information on their refund. Taxpayers prefer assisted services, such as those available by telephone or at 

IRS’s Taxpayer Assistance Centers [TACs], for more complex interactive tasks like responding to a notice. Overall, several factors influence which service channel taxpayers prefer to use, including 

the specific type of service sought, demographic characteristics, 

channel awareness, channel access, taxpayer attitudes, and previous behavior. The National Taxpayer Advocate recommended 

that the IRS make its Future State plan public and seek comments 

from taxpayers, practitioners, and others. To date, the IRS has not 

done so. The Committee is concerned about IRS’s rush to be a digital agency in light of the breach to ‘‘Get Transcript’’ which resulted 

in having to take the service offline. 

The Committee is troubled by recent TIGTA reporting findings 

that the IRS failed to identify and assist all individuals potentially 

affected by the Get Transcript breach. Specifically, TIGTA found 

that the IRS failed to send over 620,000 notification letters and 

place identity theft markers on those taxpayer accounts. The IRS 

also failed to issue IP PINs and provide free credit monitoring to 

over 79,000 individuals potentially affected by the breach. Although 

the IRS responded that it has since taken action to send notification letters and flag taxpayer accounts, the IRS did not do so until 

the conclusion of the 2016 filing season thus leaving those accounts 

at an increased risk of fraud. Further, the IRS did not take action 

to issue IP PINs to the subset of potentially affected individuals. 

The Committee strongly encourages the IRS to take the necessary 

steps in responding to all of TIGTA’s recommendations, including 

adapting a consistent policy for flagging taxpayer accounts and providing the necessary protections particularly in light of the IRS’s 

re-launch of Get Transcript and other online applications. 

The Committee is pleased that the IRS is engaged with Treasury’s Digital Service Team in working towards establishing a secure re-launch of ‘‘Get Transcript’’ and future online self-service 

functionality for taxpayers. However, the Committee is troubled 

that the successful completion rate for accessing ‘‘Get Transcript’’ 

and other online service functions is expected to be low. Not all tax-
32 

payers have mobile phones or can pass a financial verification [IRS 

internal employee testing found a 3 in 4 pass rate). The Committee 

directs the IRS to submit a written report, prepared in consultation 

with the National Taxpayer Advocate, to the Senate and House 

Committees on Appropriations, the Senate Committee on Finance, 

and the House Committee on Ways and Means that among other 

things describes the usage of and future plans for online taxpayer 

accounts, including the number and percentage of taxpayers who 

attempted to create an account and were unable to do so, describes 

at which stage the taxpayers failed to meet authentication requirements or stopped trying, and includes a demographic analysis of 

the taxpayers who succeeded in and failed at creating online accounts, including income, family size, and geographic location. For 

taxpayers who were successful in creating an online account, the 

report should also describe the frequency and purpose of use, and 

the type of transaction. This report is due 1 year from the date on 

which the online account is made available for public use. The 

Committee further expects the IRS to keep the Committee informed of its reevaluation of the secure access process and its access rates over time. 

Telephone Level of Service.—The Committee acknowledges that 

telephonic access to the IRS is important to promoting voluntary 

compliance. IRS has stated that sustained reductions in funding 

have led to a long-term decline in the telephone level of service. 

The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 provided an additional $290,000,000 to the IRS. IRS utilized $176,622,000 of this investment in Taxpayer Services to achieve a 65 percent LOS during 

the filing season and 47 percent for the full year. The Committee 

is pleased with the level of service reported during the filing season 

and expects the IRS to allocate its fiscal year 2017 appropriated resources in a manner that reflects taxpayer services as a top priority. 

Taxpayer Assistance Centers.—IRS Taxpayer Assistance Centers 

have traditionally served as a local resource to taxpayers, where 

they can ask pre-filing questions, obtain forms or publications, and 

resolve post-filing or other account issues. Forms have also been 

available through the Tax Forms Outlet Programs [TFOP] at local 

libraries, post offices, and other community sites. TACs play an important role in meeting the needs of underserved taxpayers, including rural, elderly, minority, disabled and low-income populations 

However, of the over 380 TACs locations operating nationally, 67 

TACs are currently staffed by only one person, resulting in extremely inconsistent service and effective closures of many offices 

due to staff attrition and other issues. In addition, the IRS estimates that the number of taxpayers it will assist at its TACs will 

continue to decrease. The IRS assisted 5.6 million taxpayers in fiscal year 2015 and plans to assist 4.7 million taxpayers in fiscal 

year 2016, which represents a 16 percent decline from fiscal year 

2015. 

The Committee is concerned with a growing number TAC closures and long wait times. In response, the IRS has said that taxpayers can get answers to many of their tax questions, tax forms 

and publications and much more by visiting IRS.gov. The shift to 

Internet-based services is a key element of the IRS’s ‘‘Future State’’ 
33 

plans, yet a Pew Research Center study published in 2015 found 

the percentage of American adults who do not use the Internet is 

about 16 percent, and the Taxpayer Advocate has cited other research showing large percentages of Americans who are not comfortable conducting financial transactions online. The IRS ‘‘Future 

State’’ vision does not offer any clear plan to provide efficient, costeffective in- person or telephone service to taxpayers with pre-filing 

and post-filing questions. 

Additionally, the IRS also made abrupt and significant changes 

to the TFOP, and the forms and instructions available in participating libraries, post offices and some congressional offices. Citing 

the need for further cost savings, the IRS reduced by more than 

half the number of forms and instructions sent through the TFOP 

program and with little notice prior to tax season. For underserved 

taxpayers including rural, elderly, minority, disabled and low-income populations these programs and services are often their only 

options to receive assistance or guidance from the IRS. The IRS, 

like all Federal agencies, face difficult decisions while operating in 

an austere fiscal environment. However, the IRS’s decision to reduce taxpayer services has disproportionally impacted underserved 

taxpayers making it difficult to for them to efficiently and accurately pay their annual taxes. The Committee agrees with the National Taxpayer Advocate and encourages the IRS to serve walk-in 

taxpayers in addition to taxpayers with advance appointments and 

utilize compliance personnel within commuting distance (including 

revenue agents and revenue officers) to handle overflow taxpayer 

demand, particularly during the filing season; accept tax payments 

from taxpayers without appointments and date-stamp returns for 

walk-in taxpayers who so request (e.g., a date-stamp may be needed to get a lien release or otherwise to show proof of filing by a 

particular date); and maintain a stock of Form 1040-series forms 

and instructions particularly during the filing season that taxpayers may pick up without charge. The Committee notes that in 

Filing Season 2015 the IRS discontinued distribution of printed 

Publication 17. The Committee notes that there is a cost associated 

with printing and mailing publications for every paper filer but 

does not agree with the IRS’s decision to discontinue access to taxpayers that rely on Publication 17. Therefore, the Committee directs the IRS to maintain a stock of Publication 17 in TACs, including participating libraries and post offices and provide the publication free of charge to taxpayers who request it by phone. 

Rural Service Delivery Issues.—Given the significant wait times 

and deteriorating rate of response for assistance provided through 

the national toll-free line, it is imperative that the IRS offer personal and local taxpayer assistance. The Committee notes with concern that both the overall number of TACs declined and the number of TACs currently staffed with only one employee continues to 

increase, often resulting in effective closures of the sites. While the 

IRS has created virtual customer service sites in some locations, 

the technical and financial requirements of these sites have not 

been made widely available. 

The Committee is concerned that the actions taken by the IRS 

and the proposed ‘‘Future State’’ of service leave rural taxpayers 

reliant on paid preparers or unable to obtain timely and accurate 
34 

assistance with pre- and post-filing questions. The Committee notes 

that the IRS has not sought congressional or public comment on its 

plans or offered any alternatives to meet the needs of taxpayers. 

To rectify this situation, the Committee directs the IRS to hold a 

public forum in the affected community before closing any TAC and 

notify the Senate and House Committees on Appropriations. In addition, the IRS is directed to report to the Committee the strategic 

plan to improve all taxpayer services for rural, elderly, minority, 

disabled and low-income populations, including specific plans on its 

decisionmaking process for closing TACs and how it plans to provide alternative services. As part of this strategic planning process, 

the IRS is further directed to outline its plans for soliciting and incorporating public input into its ‘‘Future State’’ planning. 

IRS Impersonation Scams.—According to TIGTA, more than 

950,000 Americans have been targeted by an IRS impersonation 

scam, with 12,000 to 13,000 people submitting complaints every 

week as of December 2015. Additionally, more than 6,400 Americans have lost a total of at least $36,500,000 as of May 2016 to this 

scam. Given the ubiquitous nature of this scam, the Committee 

commends the work that TIGTA has done thus far to combat these 

scams and encourages IRS to work with TIGTA on ways to increase awareness of this scam. 

The IRS has once again lost credibility with taxpayers by going 

against its own policy on initiating contact with taxpayers. The IRS 

has stated publicly on numerous occasions that the real IRS will 

not initiate contact with taxpayers by phone, email, text or social 

media to ask for personal or financial information. Just after 

issuing these notices, in response to a Taxpayer Advocate public 

forum, the IRS admitted that during some audits the IRS may contact the taxpayer or their representative by phone to schedule an 

appointment to begin the audit. The Committee expects the IRS to 

take a stance on its policy to initiate contact with taxpayers and 

not deviate from this policy. The Committee also expects the IRS 

to educate taxpayers on exactly how and when they should expect 

to hear from the IRS so that taxpayers know what to expect. The 

IRS should also ensure that protocols for its outsourced tax collection services are equally protective of taxpayers and their rights. 

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

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

that the Taxpayer Advocate Service Centers in these States are appropriately staffed and capable of resolving taxpayer problems of 

the most complex nature. The Committee directs the IRS to continue to staff each Taxpayer Advocate Service Center in each of 

these States with a Collection Technical Advisor and an Examination Technical Advisor in addition to the current complement of office staff. 

Community Volunteer Income Tax Assistance.—The Volunteer Income Tax Assistance [VITA] and Tax Counseling for the Elderly 

[TCE] programs are an important aspect of IRS efforts to provide 

income tax preparation assistance programs for underserved taxpayers, including rural, elderly, disabled, English as a second language, American Indian, and low-income taxpayers. According to 
35 

the National Taxpayer Advocate, in fiscal year 2015, VITA and 

TCE programs prepared approximately 3.58 million returns, an increase of about 10 percent over fiscal year 2013 levels, before the 

IRS eliminated return preparation at the TACs. With the elimination of tax return preparation services at TACs, it is critical that 

the IRS provide adequate support for VITA and TCE sites so that 

taxpayers can obtain free tax return preparation assistance to meet 

their reporting obligations and comply with the tax laws. The Committee highlights a 2013 TIGTA recommendation for VITA and 

TCE volunteer instructors, return preparers, audit reviewers, and 

site coordinators to complete intake/interview and quality review 

training annually. The Committee urges the IRS to ensure that the 

sites are equipped with sufficient and properly trained volunteers. 

Taxpayer Survey.—The Committee believes that effective tax administration requires that taxpayers understand from the outset 

what they need to do to comply with the tax laws, and that effective taxpayer service is key to taxpayer compliance and building 

public trust in the IRS. Accordingly, the Committee supports the 

National Taxpayer Advocate’s development and delivery of a survey 

to determine the willingness and ability of individual taxpayers to 

obtain and utilize IRS taxpayer service, and to identify the extent 

to which IRS services and practices promote or serve as barriers 

to tax compliance. The Committee supports the work undertaken 

by the National Taxpayer Advocate and the IRS in developing the 

Services Priority Project, a method of ranking core taxpayer service 

offerings by value to the taxpayer and value to the IRS. The Committee believes this ranking tool and the survey results will assist 

the IRS and Congress in allocating IRS resources in the most effective and cost-efficient manner. The Committee directs the IRS to 

submit a written report, prepared in consultation with the National 

Taxpayer Advocate, to the Senate and House Committees on Appropriations, the Senate Committee on Finance, and the House 

Committee on Ways and Means that provides recommendations for 

optimizing taxpayer service offerings based on the Service Priorities Project, ranking methodology for major taxpayer service activities developed collaboratively by the Wage & Investment Operating 

Division and the Taxpayer Advocate Service. 

ENFORCEMENT

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $4,860,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 4,984,919,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,860,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Enforcement appropriation provides for the examination of 

tax returns, both domestic and international; the administrative 

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

examining tax returns of exempt organizations; enforcing statutes 

relating to detection and investigation of criminal violations of the 

31 internal revenue laws; identifying underreporting of tax obligations; securing unfiled tax returns; and collecting unpaid accounts. 
36 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,860,000,000 for enforcement activities for fiscal year 2017. 

Combating Refund Fraud and Identity Theft.—Tax-related identity theft continues to plague the IRS. The Committee is deeply 

alarmed at the scale of tax fraud connected to identity theft and 

at the continued absence of a solution to protect tax filers from 

fraud. The data breach to IRS’s Get Transcript and identity protection personal identification number [IP PIN] service highlights the 

importance of the need to mitigate identity theft and combat refund fraud. TIGTA has consistently ranked protection of taxpayer 

data as one of the highest priority challenges facing the IRS while 

GAO has reported on persistent deficiencies in IRS’s internal controls. To provide relief to victims of identity theft, the IRS began 

issuing IP PINs to eligible taxpayers in fiscal year 2011. IRS’s policy was to mail IP PINs to eligible taxpayers but for those that lost 

their IP PIN, IRS provided a Web-service to retrieve this pin. IRS 

abruptly suspended this service due to security weakness that allowed criminals to retrieve an already assigned IP PIN and a file 

fraudulent tax return using that IP PIN. In a report issued in November 2015, TIGTA found IRS’s online Get Transcript and IP PIN 

applications provided only single-factor authentication despite 

NIST standards requiring multifactor authentication for high-risk 

applications. The IRS now knows that the authentication risk was 

in fact high to both the IRS and taxpayers and should have required multifactor authentication. The Committee directs the IRS 

to establish, as a top priority, stronger security measures to protect 

all tax filers before identity theft occurs, as well as reliable measures to protect tax filers who experience identity theft. The IRS 

should specifically consider the recommendations of the Treasury 

Inspector General for Tax Administration, GAO, and the national 

taxpayer advocate, including recommendations for multi-factor authentication and other measures to ensure a more secure online 

process for Americans to file taxes free from threat of theft, and to 

report back to the Committee on Appropriations within 90 days, 

documenting its plans to address this problem. 

In the 2015 report to Congress, The National Taxpayer Advocate 

has reported that the IRS has grappled to find the best approach 

for working identity theft cases. As of the end of September 2015, 

the IRS had over 600,000 identity theft [IDT] cases with taxpayer 

impact in its inventory, up nearly 150 percent from September 

2014. In fiscal year 2015, the IRS changed course and reorganized 

its identity theft victim assistance functions, centralizing them 

under one umbrella within the Wage and Investment [W&I] division. The National Taxpayer Advocate recommended that identity 

theft victims with multiple issues should be assigned a sole IRS 

contact person who would interact with them throughout and oversee the resolution of the case, no matter how many different IRS 

functions need to be involved behind the scenes. Identity theft victims must substantiate their identity with the IRS, file various 

forms, and wait months or even years to receive their tax refunds 

and unwind the account issues. Recognizing the pervasive and 

growing problem of tax-related identity theft and understanding 
37 

the need to assist taxpayers with this issue in a simple and timely 

manner, the Committee directs the IRS to assign cases of identity 

theft victims with a sole point of contact at the IRS regardless of 

the many IRS functions that may need to be involved in order to 

resolve the issue for the taxpayer and report on the full cycle time 

for resolving IDT cases. 

The Committee is deeply concerned about recent testimony from 

the IRS Commissioner during a Senate Finance Committee hearing 

that the IRS doesn’t inform victims when illegal immigrants use 

their Social Security numbers to obtain employment and then file 

false information on their W–2 forms. The IRS Commissioner responded that the agency does not take enforcement actions against 

illegal immigrants who use other people’s Social Security numbers 

to get jobs and then file their tax returns using their own IRSissued individual taxpayer identification numbers. Soon thereafter, 

the IRS stated it would reverse its standard operating procedure by 

January 2017, when the IRS will begin informing victims of employment-related identity fraud. The Committee believes these victims deserve greater transparency. The Committee notes that an 

amendment to the Taxpayer Protection Act of 2016 was recently introduced that requires the IRS to notify victims of employment-related identity theft. 

Processing of Applications for Tax-Exempt Status.—The Committee strongly believes that meaningful, transparent, and sustained corrective action is warranted to restore any erosion of public trust in the IRS, strengthen the agency, and prevent any recurrence of the circumstances that led to the use of inappropriate case 

screening criteria in the handling of applications for certain tax-exempt groups based on their political beliefs. In March 2015, TIGTA 

assessed IRS’s actions in response to its 2013 recommendations to 

improve the identification and processing of applications for tax-exempt status involving political campaign intervention TIGTA’s report found that IRS implemented significant changes to the process 

for reviewing applications for tax-exempt status. The Committee 

notes language was included in the Consolidated Appropriations 

Act of 2016 restricting the use of Federal funds to develop new IRS 

regulations covering section 501(c)(4) and that the same language 

is continued in this bill. 

Preventing Payroll Tax Fraud.—The Committee recognizes that 

many employers outsource payroll and related tax duties to thirdparty payroll service providers to help assure filing deadlines and 

deposit requirements are met and streamline business operations. 

While most payroll service providers are trustworthy, failures can 

pose devastating financial setbacks for multiple clients, particularly 

small businesses. The Committee is aware that the National Taxpayer Advocate has recommended an array of practical solutions to 

address this persistent problem, including more effective early detection of potential fraud; registration, certification, and bonding 

requirements for third-party payroll tax services; restrictions on 

changing addresses of record; and greater consideration of offers in 

compromise to assist defrauded businesses with relief from tax liability. The Committee retains an administrative provision enacted 

for fiscal year 2016 which requires that the IRS issue a notice of 

confirmation of any address change relating to an employer making 
38 

employment tax payments; that such notice shall be sent to both 

the employer’s former and new address, and requires that an officer or employee of the IRS shall give special consideration to an 

offer-in-compromise from a taxpayer who has been the victim of 

fraud by a third party payroll tax preparer. 

Prisoner Tax Refund Fraud.—The Committee is concerned about 

growth in tax refund fraud. In 2014, TIGTA reported that refund 

fraud associated with prisoner Social Security numbers remained a 

significant problem for tax administration. According to a September 2014 TIGTA report, the number of fraudulent tax returns 

filed using a prisoner’s Social Security number that were identified 

by IRS increased from approximately 37,000 tax returns in calendar year 2007 to more than 137,000 tax returns in calendar year 

2012. The refunds claimed on these tax returns increased from 

$166,000,000 to $1,000,000,000. The Committee looks forward to 

reviewing the results of TIGTA’s report underway on IRS’s efforts 

to address prisoner fraud. 

Earned Income Tax Credit Fraud.—GAO has highlighted the persistent problems with improper earned income tax credit [EITC] 

payments for years, and it is a factor underlying their designation 

of IRS Enforcement of Tax Laws as a high-risk area. The Office of 

Management and Budget has declared the Earned Income Tax 

Credit Program to be the only IRS revenue program fund at high 

risk for improper payments. The IRS estimates that 23.8 percent 

($15,600,000,000) of EITC payments made in fiscal year 2015 were 

paid in error. According to the Department of the Treasury, the 

complexity of the tax law around the EITC and the significant annual turnover within the participating population makes it difficult 

to set meaningful improper payment reduction targets. The Committee is concerned that billions of dollars are wasted every year 

because the IRS has little ability to monitor overpayments or prevent EITC payments to ineligible recipients. The Committee is encouraged by the IRS’s efforts to convene an EITC Summit as it 

seeks input on ways to reduce EITC noncompliance from stakeholders. The Committee believes a coordinated and comprehensive 

approach is needed to reduce erroneous EITC payments and looks 

forward to hearing the suggestions provided during the Summit. 

Addressing Fraud and Filing Errors in Refundable Credit Programs.—In addition to the EITC, the Department of Treasury required the IRS to evaluate the fiscal year 2015 improper payment 

risk for two other large refundable credits, the Additional Child 

Tax Credit [ACTC] and the American Opportunity Tax Credit 

[AOTC]. TIGTA recently reported that the potential ACTC improper payment rate for fiscal year 2015 was 24.2 percent, with potential improper payments totaling $5,700,000,000, and estimated 

that the potential AOTC improper payment rate for fiscal year 

2015 was 30.7 percent, with potential improper payments totaling 

$1,800,000,000. 

Affordable Care Act Fraud.—ACA created a refundable tax credit, referred to as the Premium Tax Credit [PTC], to assist individuals with the cost of their health insurance premiums. When enrolling in a Qualified Health Plan through the Exchange, eligible 

individuals can choose to have some or all of the PTC paid in advance to their insurance company as payment of their monthly pre-
39 

mium or can wait to claim all of the PTC on their tax return. 

TIGTA recently performed a review to evaluate the effectiveness of 

IRS’s verification of PTC claims during the 2015 filing season. The 

Committee agrees with TIGTA that reviews should be completed 

for those tax returns TIGTA identified for which the IRS incorrectly verified the PTC claim to ensure that individuals receive the 

correct PTC amount and IRS does not pay more than taxpayers are 

entitled to receive. The Committee supports TIGTA’s recommendation that PTC claimants should be verified before tax refunds are 

issued. 

Misclassification of Contractors.—The Committee remains concerned that staffing within the IRS’s SS–8 Program, responsible for 

making determinations as to a worker’s Federal employment tax 

status, has not kept pace with the record and sustained SS–8 filings during the past six filing seasons. The Committee believes 

that the IRS SS–8 Program is critical to ensuring that workers are 

classified correctly, identifying leads for employment tax exams 

and criminal investigations, and combating the underreporting of 

employment taxes that contributes significantly to the tax gap. The 

Committee believes it is important, given the growing workload, 

that the IRS maintain sufficient staffing at all SS–8 processing locations. The Committee directs the IRS to notify the House Appropriations Committee, the Senate Appropriations Committee, the 

House Ways and Means Committee, and the Senate Finance Committee prior to making any staffing reductions or reallocations 

within the SS–8 processing program. 

OPERATIONS SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $3,638,446,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 4,030,695,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,638,446,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Operations Support appropriation provides for overall planning and direction of the IRS including Infrastructure, including 

administrative services related to space and housing, rent and 

space alterations, buildings service maintenance, guard services, 

and non-IT equipment; Shared Services and Support, including policy management, IRS-wide support for research, strategic planning, 

communications and liaison, finance, human resources, equity, diversity, and inclusion programs, printing, postage, business systems planning, corporate training, legal services, procurement, and 

employee benefit programs; and Information Services, including the 

staffing, equipment, and related costs to manage, maintain, and operate the information systems critical to the support of tax administration programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,638,446,000 for Operations Support for fiscal year 2017. 

The Committee notes that half of IRS’s total requested increase 

for fiscal year 2017 funding is for Operations Support. The Committee remains concerned that the IRS continues to supplement 
40 

this appropriations account with the vast majority of its user fees. 

The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 provided an additional $290,000,000 to the IRS appropriations accounts, of which 

the IRS spent $95,442,000 to invest in cybersecurity. As previously 

discussed, the Committee remains concerned about the IRS’s ability to safeguard taxpayer data and is concerned about the amount 

of funding to support the re-launch of the Get Transcript application. The Committee expects the IRS to keep the Committee informed of the costs going forward to support the re-launch of Get 

Transcript as well as other online service applications. 

Information Technology Reports.—Given the size and significance 

of IRS’s IT investments and the challenges inherent in successfully 

delivering these complex IT investments, it is important that the 

Committees on Appropriations be provided reliable information to 

assist with their oversight responsibilities. While IRS has been 

submitting quarterly reports on the performance of its IT investments to the Committees, we are concerned that these reports have 

yet to address GAO’s recommendations for cumulative reporting 

and providing a quantitative measure of scope. In addition, we believe the reports could provide information that would allow the 

Committees to better gauge the performance of IRS’s IT investments. The Committee directs the IRS to submit quarterly reports 

on particular major project activities to the Committees on Appropriations and the GAO, no later than 30 days following the end of 

each calendar quarter in fiscal year 2017. The Committee expects 

the reports to include detailed, plain English explanations of the 

cumulative expenditures and schedule performance to date, specified by fiscal year; the costs and schedules for the previous 3 

months; the anticipated costs and schedules for the upcoming 3 

months; and the total expected costs to complete the following 

major information technology project activities: IRS.gov; Returns 

Remittance Processing; EDAS/IPM; Information Returns and Document Matching; E-services; Taxpayer Advocate Service Integrated 

System; Affordable Care Act administration; and other projects associated with significant changes in law. In addition, the quarterly 

report should clearly explain when the project was started; the expected date of completion; the percentage of work completed as 

compared to planned work; the current and expected state of 

functionality; any changes in schedule; and current risks unrelated 

to funding amounts and mitigation strategies. The Committee directs the Department of the Treasury to conduct a semi-annual review of IRS’s IT investments to ensure the cost, schedule, and 

scope goals of the projects are transparent. The Committee further 

directs GAO to review and provide an annual report to the Committees evaluating the cost and schedule of activities of all major 

IRS information technology projects for the year, with particular 

focus on the projects about which the IRS is submitting quarterly 

reports to the Committee. 

BUSINESS SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $290,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 343,415,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 290,000,000 
41 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Business Systems Modernization appropriation provides resources for the planning and capital asset acquisition of information technology to modernize the IRS business systems. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $290,000,000 for Business Systems 

Modernization [BSM] for fiscal year 2017. 

The Committee is concerned about IRS’s plan to invest in new 

IT capabilities for the future given the recent data breach to IRS’s 

Get Transcript and IP PIN application. In addition, the Committee 

remains concerned about exceeding planned investment costs, 

projects that fall behind schedule, and providing secure digital communications to taxpayers. 

The Committee expects the IRS to continue to submit quarterly 

reports to the Committees and GAO during fiscal year 2017, no 

later than 30 days following the end of each calendar quarter. The 

Committee expects the reports to include detailed, plain English 

explanations of the cumulative expenditures and schedule performance to date, specified by fiscal year; the costs and schedules for 

the previous 3 months; the anticipated costs and schedules for the 

upcoming 3 months; and the total expected costs to complete 

CADE2 and MeF. In addition, the quarterly report should clearly 

explain when the project was started; the expected date of completion; the percentage of work completed as compared to planned 

work; the current and expected state of functionality; any changes 

in schedule; and current risks unrelated to funding amounts and 

mitigation strategies. The Committee directs the Department of the 

Treasury to conduct a semi-annual review of CADE2 and MeF to 

ensure the cost, schedule, and scope goals of the projects are transparent. The Committee further directs GAO to review and provide 

an annual report to the Committee evaluating the cost and schedule of CADE2 and MeF activities for the year, as well as an assessment of the functionality achieved. 

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

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

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

tendency for certain projects or components to exceed schedule and 

cost estimates, the Committee urges IRS management to maintain 

close routine scrutiny of cost and schedule factors. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

The Committee includes 13 administrative provisions as follows: 

Section 101 continues a provision allowing the IRS to transfer up 

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

fiscal year 2017 to any other IRS appropriation, upon the advance 

approval of the Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 102 continues a provision maintaining a training program in taxpayers’ rights and cross-cultural relations. 
42 

Section 103 continues a provision requiring the IRS to institute 

and enforce policies and procedures, which will safeguard the confidentiality of taxpayer information and protect taxpayers against 

identity theft. 

Section 104 continues a provision directing that funds shall be 

available for improved facilities and increased staffing to support 

sufficient and effective 1–800 help line services for taxpayers including enhanced response time to taxpayer communications, particularly for victims of tax-related crimes. 

Section 105 continues a provision requiring videos produced by 

the IRS to be approved in advance by the Service-Wide Video Editorial Board. 

Section 106 continues a provision requiring the IRS to issue notices to employers of any address change request and to give special consideration to offers in compromise for taxpayers who have 

been victims of payroll tax preparer fraud. 

Section 107 continues a provision that prohibits the use of funds 

by the IRS to target United States citizens for exercising any right 

guaranteed under the First Amendment to the Constitution. 

Section 108 continues a provision that prohibits the use of funds 

by the IRS to target groups for regulatory scrutiny based on their 

ideological beliefs. 

Section 109 continues a provision that requires the IRS to comply 

with procedures on conference spending as recommended by the 

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. 

Section 110 continues provision that prohibits the use of funds 

to give bonuses or hire former employees without consideration of 

conduct and compliance with Federal tax laws. 

Section 111 continues a provision that prohibits the use of funds 

to violate the confidentiality of tax returns. 

Section 112 continues a provision which prohibits funds for prepopulated returns. Section 113 continues a provision which provides $290,000,000 to 

be used solely for measurable improvements in the customer service representative level of service rate, to improve the identification 

and prevention of refund fraud and identity theft, and to enhance 

cybersecurity to safeguard taxpayer data. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

The Committee includes 13 administrative provisions, as follows: 

Section 114 authorizes certain basic services within the Treasury 

Department in fiscal year 2017, including purchase of uniforms; 

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

with the Department of State for health and medical services to 

employees and their dependents serving in foreign countries. 

Section 115 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between Departmental Offices, Office of Inspector General, Special Inspector 

General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, Financial Crimes 

Enforcement Network, Bureau of the Fiscal Service, and Alcohol 

and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, appropriations under certain 

circumstances. 
43 

Section 116 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax 

Administration under certain circumstances. 

Section 117 prohibits the Department of the Treasury and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing from redesigning the $1 Federal 

Reserve Note. 

Section 118 authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to transfer 

funds from Salaries and Expenses, Bureau of the Fiscal Service, to 

the Debt Collection Fund as necessary to cover the costs of debt collection. Such amounts shall be reimbursed to the Salaries and Expenses account from debt collections received in the Debt Collection 

Fund. 

Section 119 requires prior approval for the construction and operation of a museum by the United States Mint. 

Section 120 prohibits the merger of the United States Mint and 

the Bureau of Engraving and Printing without prior approval of 

the committees of jurisdiction. 

Section 121 authorizes the Department’s intelligence activities. 

Section 122 permits the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to use not to exceed $5,000 from the Industrial Revolving Fund for reception and representation expenses. 

Section 123 requires the Secretary of the Treasury to develop an 

annual Capital Investment Plan. 

Section 124 continues a provision that requires a report on the 

Department’s Franchise Fund. 

Section 125 continues a provision that requires the Department 

to submit a report on economic warfare and financial terrorism. 

Section 126 continues a provision which prohibits the Department from finalizing any regulation related to the standards used 

to determine the tax-exempt status of a 501(c)(4) organization. 
(44) 

TITLE II 

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS 

APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT 

THE WHITE HOUSE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $55,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 55,214,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 55,214,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

support of the President. The White House also serves as the President’s representative before the media. In accordance with 3 U.S.C. 

105, The White House office also supports and assists the activities 

of the spouse of the President. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $55,214,000 for 

The White House, Salaries and Expenses. The recommendation is 

equal to the budget request. 

Exports to Africa.—The Committee acknowledges efforts by the 

Executive Office of the President [EOP] to designate a senior 

United States Government official to lead efforts to significantly increase United States exports to Africa as directed under section 

1206(d) of Public Law 113–66 and urges the EOP to continue to leverage resources provided in this and other acts to carry out the 

intent of the directive. 

Office of National AIDS Policy.—The Committee directs the Executive Office of the President [EOP] to allocate sufficient resources 

to continue the robust operation of the Office of National AIDS Policy [ONAP]. ONAP is responsible for leading implementation of the 

National HIV/AIDS Strategy and holding Federal agencies and 

local jurisdictions accountable for implementing effective, scalable, 

and cost-effective interventions for HIV prevention and care 

through commissioning policy research, consulting with the community, and helping jurisdictions modernize data systems and 

other activities to align with the strategy. The Committee directs 

the administration to continue to coordinate a governmentwide effort to achieve the goals of the National HIV/AIDS strategy. 
45 

EXECUTIVE RESIDENCE AT THE WHITE HOUSE

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $12,723,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 12,723,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 12,723,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

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

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

President. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,723,000 for 

the Executive Residence at the White House. The Committee recommendation is equal to the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The bill 

also continues certain restrictions on reimbursable expenses for use 

of the Executive Residence. 

WHITE HOUSE REPAIR AND RESTORATION

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $750,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 750,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 750,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account funds the repair, alteration, and improvement of 

the Executive Residence at the White House. A separate account 

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $750,000 for 

White House Repair and Restoration, equal to the fiscal year 2016 

enacted level and the budget request. 

COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $4,195,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 4,201,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,201,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Council of Economic Advisers analyzes the national economy 

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

appraises economic programs and policies of the Federal Government, and assists in the preparation of the annual Economic Report of the President to Congress. 
46 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,201,000 for 

salaries and expenses of the Council of Economic Advisers. This 

amount is equal to the budget request. 

NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL AND HOMELAND SECURITY COUNCIL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $12,800,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 13,069,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 12,800,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

security, and the Homeland Security Council advises the President 

in coordinating homeland security-related policies across the Government. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,800,000 for 

the salaries and expenses of the National Security Council and the 

Homeland Security Council. This amount is equal to the fiscal year 

2016 enacted level. 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $96,116,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 96,116,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 96,116,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Administration provides administrative services to 

the EOP. These services, defined by Executive Order 12028 of 

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $96,116,000 for 

the Office of Administration for fiscal year 2017. This amount is 

equal to the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and the budget request. 

The Committee’s recommendation includes not to exceed 

$12,760,000 to remain available until expended for modernization 

of the information technology infrastructure within the Executive 

Office of the President. 

The Committee directs the Office of Administration to place a top 

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

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

Act, the Federal Records Act, and other pertinent laws. The Office 
47 

of Administration shall continue to work closely with the National 

Archives and Records Administration [NARA] to ensure the full 

and complete maintenance and formatting of electronic records that 

will eventually be turned over to NARA. The Committee expects 

the Office of Administration to keep the Committee fully apprised 

of funding needs related to records preservation and retention. 

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $95,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 100,725,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 95,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $95,000,000 for 

the Office of Management and Budget, which is equal to the fiscal 

year 2016 enacted level. 

The Committee directs OMB to utilize sufficient resources to respond in a timely and complete manner to requests from Congress, 

in particular requests related to program funding and operations. 

Cybersecurity.—The Committee recognizes actions that were 

taken by some Federal agencies to improve their cybersecurity posture under the Federal CIO’s 30-day Cybersprint. The Committee 

looks forward to learning more about actions taken since this initiative. 

Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator.—The Committee 

continues to strongly support the Office of the Intellectual Property 

Enforcement Coordinator [IPEC], including its important work promoting private sector efforts to reduce online copyright infringement. The Committee encourages the Office to work with U.S.- 

based Internet registrars and registries to ensure that parties are 

taking voluntary, cooperative action against illegal activities online. 

Given the growing threat of cybercrime and the link between intellectual property theft and other forms of cybercrime, including 

malware and hacking, OMB should provide the Office with an additional full-time equivalent position focused on the area of 

cybercrime. Further, the Committee requests that the Annual Report required under the Pro IP Act of 2008 (15 U.S.C. 8114) on Intellectual Property Enforcement activities of the Federal Government specifically outlines online copyright piracy enforcement activities in the next report. 

Social Cost of Carbon.—OMB should not approve any regulations 

in fiscal year 2017 using the May 2013, revised July 2016, estimates for the social cost of carbon until a new working group is 

convened. The working group should include the relevant agencies 

and affected stakeholders, reexamine the social cost of carbon using 

the best available science, and revise the estimate using an accurate discount rate and domestic estimate in accordance with Execu-
48 

tive Order 12866 and OMB Circular A–4. To increase transparency, 

the working group should solicit public comments prior to finalizing 

any updates. 

Governmentwide General Provisions.—The Committee is concerned that all agencies may not be aware of, and therefore, not 

implementing, the governmentwide general provisions in title VII 

of the bill. The Committee directs OMB to issue guidance within 

60 days of enactment, notifying all agencies of their responsibilities 

to adhere to these requirements. The Committee expects OMB to 

reinforce awareness among all Federal agencies of the existence of, 

and content of, the governmentwide general provisions. 

Conferences.—The Committee continues a provision in title VII of 

the bill requiring agencies to report annually to their inspector general or senior ethics officer on conferences costing more than 

$100,000 and to notify the same official of conferences costing more 

than $20,000 within 15 days of a conference. The provision also 

prohibits funding for any travel and conference activities that are 

not in compliance with OMB Memorandum M–12–12 or any subsequent revisions to that memorandum. Agencies shall report conference expenditures in excess of $100,000 on agency Web sites and 

OMB shall notify the Committee annually in writing of any agencies failing to report this information. 

Travel.—The Committee supports OMB’s efforts to reduce costs 

across Federal agencies by eliminating unnecessary travel expenses. As part of OMB Memorandum M–12–12, Federal agencies 

were directed to reduce their travel expenses by 30 percent below 

the fiscal year 2010 level. The Committee recognizes the need for 

continued oversight of Federal travel expenses and notes OMB’s efforts to work with agencies to increase transparency and make 

smarter travel decisions. In a report to the Committee, OMB noted 

that the OMB Memorandum M–12–12 transparency model is 

strong, that the spending thresholds established in OMB Memorandum M–12–12 are appropriate and that results have demonstrated that these new policies and procedures are having an impact on how agencies plan and execute conferences. The Committee 

also noted that OMB recognizes that travel and conferences have 

a role to play in agencies carrying out their missions and that there 

are situations in which physical co-location is necessary and that 

OMB has worked diligently to ensure that the policies and controls 

implemented through OMB Memorandum M–12–12 or any subsequent revision do not curtail travel or conferences that are mission 

critical and are executed in a cost-effective manner. 

Contractor Bonuses.—The Committee is concerned about the occurrence of contract incentives being given to contractors that fail 

to meet specified cost, schedule, or performance criteria. Although 

OMB has issued guidance to reduce wasteful spending on contractor bonuses, this issue has not been fully addressed. The bill 

includes new contractor payment restrictions to require all departments and agencies funded by this act to link all contracts that 

provide awards to successful acquisition outcomes and to prohibit 

funds to pay for award or incentive fees for contractors with below 

satisfactory performance. 

Enforcement of Cybersecurity Standards.—The Committee directs 

OMB to report not later than February 1 of each year to the Com-
49 

mittees on Appropriations of the House and Senate and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs in the Senate and the Homeland Security Committee in the House regarding 

the use of budget authority to enforce cybersecurity standards. The 

report shall detail specific actions the Director has taken pursuant 

to section 3553(a)(5) of title 44, United States Code, including any 

actions taken pursuant to section 11303(b)(5) of title 40, United 

States Code. 

Scientific Instruments.—The Committee is aware that the Office 

of Management and Budget is in the process of implementing a 

‘‘category management’’ initiative that will help improve the procurement process and utilize the Federal Government’s buying 

power to maximize value for taxpayers and reduce duplication. In 

some cases, individual agencies engage in smaller scale procurements of scientific instruments when opportunities may exist to 

procure the appropriate instruments governmentwide on a larger 

scale, leading to cost savings to the Federal Government. The Committee notes that research at Federal agencies may also require 

specific instrumentation for research that cannot take advantage of 

government purchasing economies of scale. The Committee encourages OMB, as it implements category management, to review agencies’ practices for procuring scientific instruments, particularly 

smaller scale procurements, and ensure that the new category 

management system provides a mechanism for regular evaluation 

of scientific instrument purchases. 

Good Guidance.—The Committee directs the Office of Management and Budget [OMB] to remind Federal agencies that it must 

follow OMB’s Final Bulletin for Agency Good Guidance Practices 

when issuing guidance. It directs OMB to update its Good Guidance Practices to require all agencies to conduct a retrospective review of guidance documents regularly with public input that the 

agency solicits, to determine if any of its guidance is duplicative, 

outdated, ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome and 

needs to be modified, streamlined, or repealed. It also directs OMB 

to send a letter to all agencies to require them to review the Government Accountability Report, Regulatory Guidance Processes: Selected Departments Could Strengthen Internal Control and Dissemination Practices, and determine whether the agency is meeting 

the recommendations made in the report, and if needed, adjust 

their practices accordingly to meet the recommendations. 

OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $20,047,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 19,274,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 19,274,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

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

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

priorities for the National Drug Control Program. In addition, 

ONDCP administers the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas 
50 

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

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

research to support the formulation of the National Drug Control 

Strategy. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $19,274,000 for 

ONDCP’s salaries and expenses. 

Interdiction.—The Committee supports efforts to reduce illegal 

drug use in the United States. In order to stem the tide of illegal 

drugs coming into this country, interdiction must be a priority. A 

core component of our national drug control strategy must be effective coordination with other Federal agencies to intercept and disrupt foreign drug shipments before they get to the United States. 

Additionally, the United States should work with international 

partners, particularly those in Mexico, to eradicate poppy fields and 

disrupt illicit drug production. 

FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS

HIGH INTENSITY DRUG TRAFFICKING AREAS PROGRAM

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $250,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 196,410,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 255,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas [HIDTA] program 

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

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

State, and local law enforcement entities operating in those areas 

most adversely affected by drug trafficking. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $255,000,000 for 

the HIDTA program. The Committee directs that funding shall be 

provided for the existing HIDTAs at no less than the fiscal year 

2016 level. 

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

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

may be used for auditing services and associated activities. 

The Committee directs that HIDTA funds be transferred to the 

appropriate drug control agencies expeditiously and includes provisions in the bill to help prevent delay. Transferred funds that are 

no longer necessary for their original purpose may be transferred 

back to the HIDTA program. 

HIDTA funds should not be used to supplant existing support for 

ongoing Federal, State, or local drug control operations normally 
51 

funded out of the operating budgets of each agency. ONDCP is directed to withhold all HIDTA funds from a State until such time 

as a State or locality has met its financial obligation. 

Heroin and Opioid Abuse Initiatives.—The Committee is gravely 

concerned about the public health crisis unfolding across the 

United States as the rate of overdose deaths involving heroin and 

prescription opioid use has reached record levels. According to the 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], the rate of 

deaths from drug overdoses involving opioid pain relievers and heroin has increased by 200 percent since 2000. The Committee urges 

the Office of National Drug Control Policy [ONDCP] to consult with 

the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas [HIDTAs] to disrupt the 

distribution, use, and prevalence of heroin and opioid abuse. Within 90 days of enactment of this act, the Committee directs ONDCP 

to report to the Committee on how the administration intends to 

address the distribution, use, and prevalence of heroin and opioid 

abuse and ONDCP’s coordination with other Federal agencies, 

Drug-Free Community coalitions, and HIDTA partners to combat 

this public health crisis. 

OTHER FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $109,810,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 98,480,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 109,871,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

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

Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act (Public 

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

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

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

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $109,871,000 for 

Other Federal Drug Control Programs. Within this amount, the 

Committee provides the following funding levels: 

Amount 

Drug-Free Communities Support Program ........................................................................................................... $95,000,000 

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

Drug court training, including standards training, and technical assistance .................................................. 2,000,000 

Anti-doping activities ........................................................................................................................................... 9,500,000 

World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA] ....................................................................................................................... 2,121,000 

Activities as authorized by Public Law 109–469, section 1105 ........................................................................ 1,250,000 

Drug-Free Communities Support Program.—ONDCP directs the 

Drug-Free Communities Support Program [DFCSP] in partnership 

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

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

grants support coalitions of youth; parents; media; law enforce-
52 

ment; school officials; faith-based organizations; fraternal organizations; State, local, and tribal government agencies; healthcare professionals; and other community representatives. The DFCSP enables these coalitions to strengthen their coordination and prevention efforts, encourage citizen participation in substance abuse reduction efforts, and disseminate information about effective programs. The Committee provides $95,000,000 for the continuation of 

the DFCSP. 

The Committee includes a provision in the bill directing ONDCP 

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

by Public Law 109–469. 

UNANTICIPATED NEEDS

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $800,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 1,000,000 

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

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

These funds enable the President to meet unanticipated exigencies in support of the national interest, security, or defense. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $800,000, which is the same as the 

fiscal year 2016 enacted level. 

PRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... $7,582,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 7,582,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account supports the Office of Administration for expenses 

associated with the transition to the next Presidential administration. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,582,000 for 

Presidential Transition Administrative Support, which is equal to 

the budget estimate. The account was not funded in fiscal year 

2016 because there was no Presidential transition in that year. 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY OVERSIGHT AND REFORM

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $30,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 35,200,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 30,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The goal of the Information Technology Oversight and Reform 

[ITOR] program is to drive value in Federal IT investments by 

making smarter investment decisions and reducing waste, duplica-
53 

tion, and inefficient uses of IT through data-driven investment 

management, deliver digital services to 25 Federal agencies, and 

protect IT assets and information by improving oversight of Federal cybersecurity practices. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $30,000,000 for the ITOR program. 

The Committee appreciates the administration’s comprehensive 

and innovative approach to improving IT development processes 

and maximizing efficiencies across the Federal IT portfolio. The 

Federal Government plans to invest approximately $89,000,000,000 

during fiscal year 2017 in IT development for a wide variety of capabilities, spanning, for example, from basic desktop computing to 

a searchable database for investigating terrorist financing activity. 

However, it is clear to the Committee that this spending on IT does 

not produce $89,000,000,000 in value for the public as a result of 

IT projects that arrive late or over budget. The Committee notes 

that Federal IT projects have failed because of a lack of oversight 

and governance. ITOR funding in fiscal year 2017 will help drive 

value in Federal IT investments by making smarter investment decisions and reducing waste, duplication, and inefficient uses of IT, 

delivering digital services, improving oversight of Federal 

cybersecurity practices, and providing IT training. 

IT Dashboard.—The Committee supports the management and 

enhancement of the IT Dashboard, a Web site that includes cost, 

schedule, and performance data for major IT investments. The 

Committee directs the EOP to make PortfolioStat, which is the 

process where OMB and agencies examine IT portfolios to identify 

duplicative spending and reduce costs, and other technology reform 

savings and performance metrics available to the public on the IT 

dashboard. OMB shall ensure that current and accurate data on 

these investments are available throughout the entire year. The 

Committee directs OMB to use ITOR funding to work with agencies to implement the Federal Information Technology Acquisition 

Reform Act [FITARA], which is designed to improve Federal IT acquisitions. Specifically, the Committee directs OMB to report quarterly to the Committee on Appropriations on the cost savings, 

avoidance, and reductions in duplicative IT investments. 

Digital Service.—The Committee supports the formation of U.S. 

Digital Service [USDS] and their role in collaborating with Federal 

agencies to implement digital and technology practices on the 10 

highest priority IT investment projects that are under development 

across Federal agencies. The Committee encourages USDS to use 

the increase in ITOR funding to become more fully engaged on 

each one of the projects. In addition, the Committee encourages 

OMB to provide detail on how the 10 highest priority IT investment projects are selected and report quarterly to the Committee 

on Appropriations on the status of these projects. 

Cybersecurity.—Recent cybersecurity breaches have demonstrated the need for the Federal Government to safeguard data 

and improve its cybersecurity posture. The Committee expects 

OMB’s E–Gov Cyber will provide oversight of agency cybersecurity 

programs and focus on agencies’ performance relative to the 

Cybersecurity Cross-Agency Priority [CAP] Goal, which was de-
54 

signed to assess agency implementation of basic cybersecurity principles to ensure a common Federal baseline for combating cyber 

threats. It is clear to the Committee that the Federal Government 

lags in IT security best practices. For example, Strong Authentication remains a key challenge, with civilian agencies reporting 42 

percent of their goal. According to GAO [GAO–15–725T], ‘‘While recent government-wide initiatives hold promise for bolstering the 

Federal cybersecurity posture, it is important to note that no single 

technology or set of practices is sufficient to protect against all 

these threats. A ‘defense in depth’ strategy is required that includes well-trained personnel, effective and consistently applied 

processes, and appropriately implemented technologies. While 

agencies have elements of such a strategy in place, more needs to 

be done to fully implement it and to address existing weaknesses. 

In particular, implementing GAO and Inspector General recommendations will strengthen agencies’ ability to protect their systems and information, reducing the risk of a potentially devastating cyber attack.’’ The Committee expects OMB to consult 

with GAO on the Cybersecurity CAP goal key performance indicators and metric targets. In addition, the Committee expects OMB 

as part of its 30-day Cybersecurity Sprint, to submit its Federal Civilian Cybersecurity Strategy to GAO for review. The Committee 

encourages OMB to report on its efforts to ensuring agencies having robust protections in place to address cyber security threats, including the recent breach at OPM. 

SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO THE PRESIDENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $4,228,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 4,228,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,228,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides for staff and expenses to enable the 

Vice President to provide assistance to the President in connection 

with the performance of executive duties and responsibilities. 

These funds also support the official activities of the spouse of the 

Vice President. The Vice President also has a staff funded by the 

Senate to assist him in the performance of his legislative duties. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,228,000 for 

special assistance to the President. This amount is equal to the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and the budget request. 

OFFICIAL RESIDENCE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT

OPERATING EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $299,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 299,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 299,000 
55 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account supports the care and operation of the Vice President’s residence on the grounds of the Naval Observatory. These 

funds specifically support equipment, furnishings, dining facilities, 

and services required to perform and discharge the Vice President’s 

official duties, functions, and obligations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $299,000 for the 

official residence of the Vice President. This amount is equal to the 

budget request and the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE

PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Section 201 continues a provision that provides flexibility in the 

use of funds in accounts under the EOP. 

Section 202 requires the Office of Management and Budget 

[OMB] to report on the costs of implementation the Dodd-Frank 

Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111– 

203). 

Section 203 requires the Director of the OMB to include a statement of budgetary impact with any Executive order issued during 

fiscal year 2017. 
(56) 

TITLE III 

THE JUDICIARY 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Established under Article III of the Constitution, the judicial 

branch of Government is a separate but equal branch. The Federal 

judiciary consists of the Supreme Court, United States Courts of 

Appeals, District Courts, Bankruptcy Courts, Court of International Trade, Court of Federal Claims, and several other entities 

and programs. The organization of the judiciary, the district and 

circuit boundaries, the places of holding court, and the number of 

Federal judges are legislated by the Congress and signed into law 

by the President. 

The Committee’s recommended funding levels support the Federal judiciary’s role of providing equal justice under the law and include sufficient funds to support this critical mission. The recommended funding level includes the salaries of judges and support staff and the operation and security of our Nation’s courts. 

The judicial branch is subject to the same funding constraints 

facing the executive and legislative branches. It is imperative that 

the Federal judiciary devote its resources primarily to the retention 

of staff. Further, it is also important that the judiciary contain controllable costs such as travel, construction, and other expenses. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $75,838,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 76,668,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 76,668,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Supreme Court consists of nine justices appointed under Article III of the Constitution of the United States, 

one of whom is appointed as Chief Justice of the United States. 

The Supreme Court acts as the final arbiter in the Federal court 

system. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $76,668,000 for 

the salaries and expenses of personnel, and the costs of operating 

the Supreme Court, excluding the care of the building and grounds. 

The recommendation is $830,000 above the fiscal year 2016 funding level and equal to the budget request. 
57 

CARE OF THE BUILDING AND GROUNDS

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $9,964,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 14,868,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 14,868,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Care of the Building and Grounds, for expenditure by the Architect of the Capitol, provides for the structural and mechanical care 

of the United States Supreme Court Building and Grounds, including maintenance and operation of mechanical, electrical, and electronic equipment. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $14,868,000 for 

personnel and other services related to the Supreme Court building 

and grounds, which is supervised by the Architect of the Capitol. 

The recommendation is $4,904,000 above the fiscal year 2016 funding level and equal to the budget request. The increase is for costs 

associated with the continuation of the exterior stone restoration 

project that includes the completion of the west facade and the ongoing restoration of the north, south, and east facades. 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $30,872,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 30,108,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 30,108,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was 

established on October 1, 1982 under Article III of the Constitution. The court was formed by the merger of the United States 

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals and the appellate division of 

the United States Court of Claims. The court consists of 12 judges 

who are appointed by the President, with the advice and consent 

of the Senate. Judges are appointed to the court under Article III 

of the Constitution of the United States. 

The Federal Circuit has nationwide jurisdiction in a variety of 

subjects, including international trade, Government contracts, patents, certain claims for money from the United States Government, 

Federal personnel, and veterans’ benefits. Appeals to the court 

come from all Federal district courts, the United States Court of 

Federal Claims, the United States Court of International Trade, 

and the United States Court of Veterans Appeals. The court also 

takes appeals of certain administrative agencies’ decisions, including the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Board of Contract Appeals, the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, and the 

Trademark Trial and Appeals Board. Decisions of the United 

States International Trade Commission, the Office of Compliance of 

the United States Congress, and the Government Accountability 

Office Personnel Appeals Board are also reviewable by the court. 
58 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $30,108,000. 

The recommendation is $764,000 below the fiscal year 2016 funding level and the same as the budget request. 

UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $18,160,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 18,462,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 18,462,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Court of International Trade, located in New 

York City, consists of nine Article III judges. The court has exclusive nationwide jurisdiction over civil actions brought against the 

United States, its agencies and officers, and certain civil actions 

brought by the United States, arising out of import transactions 

and the administration and enforcement of the Federal customs 

and international trade laws. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $18,462,000. 

The recommendation is $302,000 above the fiscal year 2016 funding level and the same as the budget request. 

COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND OTHER JUDICIAL

SERVICES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $4,918,969,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 5,045,785,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,045,785,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Salaries and Expenses is one of four accounts that provide total 

funding for the Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services. In addition to funding the salaries of judges and support staff, this account also funds the operating costs of appellate, 

district, and bankruptcy courts, the Court of Federal Claims, and 

probation and pretrial services offices. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,045,785,000 

for salaries and expenses. The recommendation is $126,816,000 

above the fiscal year 2016 funding level and the same as the request. 

The Committee appreciates the judiciary’s ongoing efforts to contain costs. For more than 10 years the judiciary has been focused 

on cost containment and changes made to date have reduced current and future costs for: rent, information technology, magistrate 

judges, compensation of court staff and law clerks, law books, probation and pretrial services supervision work, and other areas. The 
59 

Committee understands that further cost containment initiatives 

will expand the use of shared administrative services among the 

courts of appeals, district courts, bankruptcy courts, probation and 

pretrial services offices, and Federal defender organizations to reduce duplicative human resources, procurement, financial management, and information technology activities. The judiciary is also 

exploring voluntary consolidation of offices and other longer-term 

changes that would further reduce growth in personnel and operational costs. Given the constrained Federal budget environment, 

the Committee encourages the judiciary to continue these cost-cutting efforts. 

VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION TRUST FUND

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $6,050,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 6,260,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 6,260,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Enacted by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 

(Public Law 99–660), the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is 

a Federal no-fault program designed to resolve a perceived crisis in 

vaccine tort liability claims that threatened the continued availability of childhood vaccines nationwide. The statute’s primary intention is the creation of a more efficient adjudicatory mechanism 

that ensures a no-fault compensation result for those allegedly injured or killed by certain covered vaccines. This program protects 

the availability of vaccines in the United States by diverting a substantial number of claims from the tort arena. 

Not only did this act create a special fund to pay judgments 

awarded under the act, but it also created the Office of Special 

Masters within the United States Court of Federal Claims to hear 

vaccine injury cases. The act stipulates that up to eight special 

masters may be appointed for this purpose. The special masters expenditures are reimbursed to the judiciary for vaccine injury cases 

from a special fund set up under the Vaccine Act. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,260,000. The recommendation is $210,000 above fiscal year 2016 funding level 

and the same as the budget request. 

DEFENDER SERVICES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $1,004,949,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 1,056,326,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,054,468,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Defender Services program ensures the right to counsel 

guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, the Criminal Justice Act (18 

U.S.C. 3006A(e)) and other congressional mandates for those who 

cannot afford to retain counsel and other necessary defense services. The Criminal Justice Act provides that courts appoint counsel 

from Federal public and community defender organizations or from 

a panel of private attorneys established by the court. The Defender 
60 

Services program helps to maintain public confidence in the Nation’s commitment to equal justice under the law and ensures the 

successful operation of the constitutionally based adversary system 

of justice by which Federal criminal laws and federally guaranteed 

rights are enforced. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,054,468,000. 

The recommendation is $49,519,000 above the fiscal year 2016 

funding level and $1,858,000 below the budget request. In the fiscal 

year 2016 enacted bill, the Committee provided funding as requested by the judiciary, to begin implementation of new staffing 

formulas that will provide additional staffing resources to Federal 

defender offices to further improve the quality of representation to 

indigent defendants accused of a Federal crime. The Committee’s 

recommendation supports a current services operating level for the 

Defender Services program for fiscal year 2017 as well as the continued implementation of the staffing formulas for Federal defender offices. The Committee is aware of concerns expressed by 

some that there is an imbalance in training and support resources 

available to Federal prosecutors versus court-appointed counsel in 

Federal criminal cases. The Committee expects the judiciary to address training and support needs for the Defender Services program through the annual budget process. 

FEES OF JURORS AND COMMISSIONERS

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $44,199,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 43,723,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 39,929,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides for the statutory fees and allowances of 

grand and petit jurors and for the compensation of jury and land 

commissioners. Budgetary requirements depend primarily upon the 

volume and the length of jury trials demanded by parties to both 

civil and criminal actions and the number of grand juries being 

convened by the courts at the request of the United States Attorneys. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $39,929,000. 

The recommendation is $4,261,000 below the fiscal year 2016 funding level and $3,794,000 below the request. 

COURT SECURITY

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $538,196,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 565,388,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 565,388,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Court Security appropriation was established in 1983 and 

funds the necessary expenses incident to the provision of protective 
61 

guard services, and the procurement, installation, and maintenance 

of security systems and equipment for United States courthouses 

and other facilities housing Federal court operations, including 

building access control, inspection of mail and packages, directed 

security patrols, perimeter security provided by the Federal Protective Service, and other similar activities as authorized by section 

1010 of the Judicial Improvement and Access to Justice Act (Public 

Law 100–702). 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $565,388,000. 

The recommendation is $27,192,000 above the fiscal year 2016 

funding level and the same as the budget request. 

The Committee recommendation includes funding for the continued phased implementation of additional court security officers at 

Federal courthouses as recommended by the U.S. Marshals Service 

[USMS]. The USMS has recommended a new staffing standard to 

increase the number of court security officers by 346 between fiscal 

years 2016 and 2020 (an average of approximately 69 per year) to 

further strengthen courthouse security. The new officers will be 

posted in security control rooms and at garage/loading docks at 

large courthouses as well as at ‘‘forward watch’’ positions outside 

courthouse entrances to identify and address threats earlier, before 

they gain entry to the courthouse. 

The Committee expects to continue to be kept apprised of the judiciary’s plans to address aging and failing physical access control 

systems [PACS] at Federal courthouses nationwide. These systems 

control access to facilities and secure space for judges, authorized 

Federal employees, and contractors. The Committee strongly supports secure Federal courthouse facilities and the safety of judges, 

staff, litigants and the public in those facilities. The Committee is 

supportive of the judiciary’s efforts to develop a comprehensive 

plan to replace PACS systems and encourages the judiciary to 

transmit to Congress budget requests for PACS systems that address the judiciary’s highest priority PACS needs. 

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $85,665,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 87,748,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 87,748,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Administrative Office [AO] of the United States Courts was 

created in 1939 by an act of Congress. It serves the Federal judiciary in carrying out its constitutional mission to provide equal justice under the law. Beyond providing numerous services to the Federal courts, the AO provides support and staff counsel to the Judicial Conference of the United States and its committees, and implements Judicial Conference policies as well as applicable Federal 

statutes and regulations. The AO is the focal point for communication and coordination within the Federal judiciary and with Con-
62 

gress, the executive branch, and the public on behalf of the judiciary. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $87,748,000. 

This recommendation is $2,083,000 above the fiscal year 2016 

funding level and the same as the budget request. 

FEDERAL JUDICIAL CENTER

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $27,719,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 28,335,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 28,335,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Judicial Center, located in Washington, DC, improves the management of Federal judicial dockets and court administration through education for judges and staff, and research, 

evaluation, and planning assistance for the courts and the Judicial 

Conference. The Center’s responsibilities include educating judges 

and other judicial branch personnel about legal developments and 

efficient litigation management and court administration. Additionally, the Center also analyzes the efficacy of case and court management procedures and ensures the Federal judiciary is aware of 

the methods of best practice. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $28,335,000. 

The recommendation is $616,000 above the fiscal year 2016 funding level and the same as the budget request. 

UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $17,570,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 18,150,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 18,150,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Sentencing Commission establishes, reviews, 

and revises sentencing guidelines, policies, and practices for the 

Federal criminal justice system. The Commission is also required 

to monitor the operation of the guidelines and to identify and report necessary changes to the Congress. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $18,150,000. 

The recommendation is $580,000 above the fiscal year 2016 funding level and the same as the budget request. 
63 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—THE JUDICIARY

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

The Committee recommends the following administrative provisions for the judiciary: 

Section 301 allows the judiciary to expend funds for the employment of experts and consultative services. 

Section 302 allows the judiciary, subject to the Committee’s reprogramming procedures, to transfer up to 5 percent between appropriations, but limits to 10 percent the amount that may be 

transferred into any one appropriation. 

Section 303 limits official reception and representation expenses 

incurred by the Judicial Conference of the United States to no 

more than $11,000. 

Section 304 grants the judicial branch the same tenant alteration 

authorities as the executive branch. 

Section 305 provides continued authority for a court security 

pilot program. 

Section 306 extends for 1 year the authorization of a temporary 

judgeship in Kansas, Missouri, Alabama, Arizona, Florida, New 

Mexico, Texas, California, and North Carolina. 

Section 307 extends for 1 year the authorization of temporary 

bankruptcy judgeships in Delaware, Florida, Michigan, Puerto Rico 

and Virginia. 

Section 308 is a new provision relating to a commission to study 

the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 
(64) 

TITLE IV 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

FEDERAL PAYMENTS

FEDERAL FUNDS

The Appropriations Committees have a special relationship with 

the District of Columbia that is unlike any other city in the country. Under the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997, the Federal Government is required to fund the court operations of the District of Columbia, offender and defendant supervision, and defendant representation. 

Title IV of this Act provides Federal payments totaling 

$614,408,000 to meet these statutory obligations. Title IV also includes $131,930,000 in other Federal payments to fund initiatives 

in areas including education and security. In addition, the United 

States Department of Justice provides hundreds of United States 

Attorneys and Deputy United States Marshals to prosecute local 

crimes and provide security at the D.C. Superior Court. The Federal Bureau of Prisons houses thousands of District of Columbia 

prisoners. Federal taxpayers do not fund similar activities in any 

other city. A total of $746,338,000 in Federal funds are estimated to be 

available to the District of Columbia government, the District of 

Columbia Courts, the District of Columbia Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency, and other DC entities. This is 

$16,495,000 above the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and 

$17,200,000 below the budget request. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR RESIDENT TUITION SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $40,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 40,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 30,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Resident Tuition Support program was created by the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 (Public Law 106–98), 

expanded through the District of Columbia College Access Improvement Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–157), and amended and reauthorized through Public Law 110–97. The program provides grants 

of up to $10,000 annually for undergraduate District students to 

attend eligible public 4-year universities and colleges nationwide. 

The grants are applied toward the cost of the difference between 

in-State and out-of-State tuition. Grants of up to $2,500 are provided for students to attend private institutions in the DC metropolitan area, private historically Black colleges and universities nationwide, and public 2-year community colleges nationwide. 
65 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $30,000,000 

for the resident tuition support program. The District of Columbia 

can contribute local funds to this program if there is demand for 

the program above the level of Federal funds available. 

Since inception, the Resident Tuition Support program has 

awarded over $350,000,000 and assisted over 24,000 students enroll in college. The program has also been expanded twice while enrollment rates and the percentage of undergraduate District students receiving the maximum $10,000 award have fluctuated. According to the National Center for Education Statistics reports on 

nationwide undergraduate enrollment, ‘‘while total undergraduate 

enrollment increased by 37 percent between 2000 and 2010, enrollment decreased by 4 percent between 2010 and 2014. Undergraduate enrollment is projected to increase 14 percent from 17.3 

million to 19.8 million students between 2014 and 2025.’’ The 10- 

year accomplishment report of the Resident Tuition Support program noted that many grantees drop out on their path to a degree 

and 41 percent graduate from college in 6 years. According to the 

most recent data available, about 60 percent of students nationwide who began seeking a bachelor’s degree in 2008 completed that 

degree within 6 years, compared to approximately 51 percent in the 

Resident Tuition Support program. It is important for the program 

to realize a return on its investment, wherein every grantee earns 

a college degree. Given the changing landscape in nationwide college enrollment and graduation rates, the Committee directs GAO 

to conduct a review of the D.C. TAG program. This review should 

assess, to the extent possible, trends in eligibility, enrollment, performance and outcomes, and describe the steps taken to provide 

support to current participants. The review should also consider 

other available resources for the program and provide an analysis 

of scholarship programs offered by other municipalities in the 

United States, including a comparison of participant requirements, 

administrative expenses, outcomes and funding sources. 

In addition, the Committee directs that the State Superintendent 

shall include, as a component of the fiscal year 2018 budget justification submission, an annual update of the District’s efforts, including research findings, to enhance the retention, persistence, 

and graduation rates of program participants, including early 

awareness and readiness initiatives to promote academic college 

preparation, guidance, and other support mechanisms and partnerships. The budget justification should also describe the status and 

effectiveness of cost containment measures instituted. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR EMERGENCY PLANNING AND SECURITY COSTS

IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $13,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 34,895,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 34,895,000 
66 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This Federal payment provides funds for emergency planning 

and security costs related to the presence of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia and surrounding jurisdictions. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $34,895,000, 

for emergency planning and security costs, which is equal to the request. The Committee recommendation includes $14,900,000 to 

meet the District’s regular, expected annual planning and security 

costs and $19,995,000 for one-time costs associated with the 2017 

Presidential Inauguration. The 2017 request includes a greater 

amount for the District’s inaugural expenses than for prior inauguration years. In addition, as of June 2016 the District has over 

$24 million in unobligated balances in this account that remain 

available until expended. As has been the case with past inaugurations, any shortfall between the request and actual inaugural expenses incurred by the District can be covered through the use of 

existing unobligated balances in the District’s emergency planning 

and security account, the account used to fund DC’s inaugural expenses; a subsequent appropriation; or funding from other Federal 

sources. 

The Committee directs the District of Columbia to submit a detailed budget justification for emergency planning and security 

with its funding request for fiscal year 2018. The Committee further directs the District of Columbia to submit, within 60 days of 

the end of fiscal year 2017, a report to the House and the Senate 

Committees on Appropriations detailing the purposes and amounts 

expended using the funds, particularly noting any deviation from 

the original proposed spending. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $274,401,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 274,681,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 274,681,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Under the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government 

Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105–33, title XI), the Federal 

Government is required to finance the District of Columbia Courts, 

the judicial branch of the District of Columbia government. This 

Federal payment to the District of Columbia Courts funds the operations of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, Superior Court, 

the Court System, and the Capital Improvement Program. By law, 

the annual budget includes estimates of the expenditures for the 

operations of the Courts prepared by the Joint Committee on Judicial Administration, the Court’s policy-making body, as well as the 

President’s recommendation for funding the Courts’ operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment to the District of 

Columbia Courts of $274,681,000, which is $280,000 above the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. This amount includes $14,414,000 for 
67 

the Court of Appeals, $125,961,000 for the Superior Court, 

$75,585,000 for the Court System, and $58,721,000 for capital improvements to courthouse facilities. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR DEFENDER SERVICES IN DISTRICT OF

COLUMBIA COURTS

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $49,890,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 49,890,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 49,890,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The District of Columbia Courts appoint and compensate attorneys to represent persons who are financially unable to obtain such 

representation. The Defender Services programs provide counsel 

for indigent persons who are charged with criminal offenses, for 

family proceedings involving child abuse, neglect, and termination 

of parental rights, and for guardianship proceedings for protection 

of mentally incapacitated individuals and minors whose parents 

are deceased. 

In addition to legal representation, these programs provide indigent persons with services such as transcripts of court proceedings, 

expert witness testimony, foreign and sign language interpretation, 

and investigations and genetic testing. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $49,890,000 

for Defender Services in the District of Columbia Courts. This is 

the same as the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and the same as the 

budget request. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER

SUPERVISION AGENCY FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $244,763,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 248,008,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 248,008,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency [CSOSA] 

for the District of Columbia is an independent Federal agency created by the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government 

Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105–33, title XI). CSOSA acquired the operational responsibilities for the former District agencies in charge of probation and parole, and houses the Pretrial 

Services Agency within its framework. The mission of CSOSA is to 

increase public safety, prevent crime, reduce recidivism, and support the fair administration of justice in close collaboration with 

the community. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $248,008,000, 

which is the same as the request. Of this amount, $65,287,000 is 

designated for the Pretrial Services Agency and $182,721,000 is 

designated for the Community Supervision Program. 
68 

The Community Supervision Program’s [CSP] challenge in effectively supervising and reducing recidivism among the offender population is substantial. Many offenders have significant needs, are 

a high risk to public safety and are prone to recidivate. Offenders 

who fail to successfully complete supervision and/or recidivate place 

an enormous burden on the offender’s family, the community and 

the entire criminal justice system. 

The Committee notes that CSP research of offender outcomes has 

shown that, compared to the total supervised population, offenders 

who recidivate are more likely to be younger, test positive for 

drugs, have unstable housing, lack employment, be supervised as 

part of a mental health caseload, and be assessed by CSP at the 

highest risk levels. The Committee supports the CSP’s efforts to 

continue to adjust its programs and reallocate resources toward effective supervision of the highest risk and highest need offenders. 

The Committee also notes the efforts of the Pretrial Services 

Agency to ensure public safety through high quality risk-assessment, supervision, testing and treatment procedures. Funds provided will help support efforts to improve identification of defendants who pose a higher risk of pretrial failure, enhance supervision 

and oversight of these defendants, and work with local partners to 

expand services and support for persons with substance dependence and mental health needs. In addition, the bill also includes a 

one-time increase for the Pretrial Services Agency for the costs associated with information technology requirements necessary for 

the establishment of a comprehensive in-house synthetics testing 

program. This funding will remain available until September 30, 

2019. These resources will support redesign of the existing drug 

management system to accommodate additional substances for 

testing, including additional synthetics, and allow PSA to provide 

critical trend information to enhance public safety. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE FOR THE

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $40,889,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 41,829,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 41,829,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Public Defender Service [PDS] for the District of Columbia, 

an independent organization established by a District of Columbia 

statute (16 D.C. Code 2–1601–1608), has a distinct mission to provide and promote quality legal representation services within the 

District of Columbia justice system. PDS provides legal representation to indigent adults and children facing loss of liberty and provides support in the form of training, consultation, and legal reference services to members of the local bar appointed as counsel 

in criminal, juvenile, and mental health cases involving indigent 

individuals. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment to the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia of $41,829,000, which 

is equal to the budget request. 
69 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER AND

SEWER AUTHORITY

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $14,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 14,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 14,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Approximately one-third of the District of Columbia is served by 

a combined sewer system, constructed by the Federal Government 

in 1890, in which both sanitary waste and storm water flow 

through the same pipes. When the collection system or the Blue 

Plains treatment plant reach capacity, typically during periods of 

heavy rainfall, the system is designed to overflow the excess water. 

This mixture of sewage and storm water runoff is discharged to the 

Anacostia and Potomac Rivers, Rock Creek, and tributary waters 

between 60 and 75 times each year. Under a judicial consent decree entered on March 23, 2005, the Water and Sewer Authority 

is undertaking a 20-year, $2,600,000,000 sewer construction program to reduce combined sewer overflows [CSO]. The Clean Rivers 

Project includes deep underground storage tunnels, side tunnels to 

reduce flooding, pump station rehabilitation, and the elimination of 

over a dozen CSO outfalls along the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers 

and Rock Creek. When completed in 2025, this project is expected 

to vastly improve water quality and significantly reduce contaminated discharges into and debris in our Nation’s capital waterways 

as well as improve the health of the Chesapeake Bay. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $14,000,000 to 

be matched by at least $14,000,000 provided by the Water and 

Sewer Authority (DC Water), to continue implementation of the 

Long-Term Combined Sewer Overflow Control Plan. This is the 

same as the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING

COUNCIL

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $1,900,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 2,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Criminal Justice Coordinating Council [CJCC] provides a 

forum for District of Columbia and Federal law enforcement to 

identify criminal justice issues and solutions, and improve the coordination of their efforts. In addition, the CJCC developed and 

maintains the Justice Integrated Information System which provides for the sharing of information with Federal and local law enforcement. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $2,000,000 to 

CJCC. This is $100,000 above the fiscal year 2016 enacted level 

and the same as the budget request. 
70 

The Committee directs the CJCC to submit annual performance 

measures in an annual report to accompany the fiscal year 2018 

budget justification, which should also describe progress made on 

specific CJCC initiatives. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR JUDICIAL COMMISSIONS

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $565,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 585,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 585,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Judicial Nomination Commission [JNC] recommends a panel 

of three candidates to the President for each judicial vacancy in the 

District of Columbia Court of Appeals and Superior Court. From 

the panel selected by the JNC, the President nominates a person 

for each vacancy and submits his or her name for confirmation to 

the Senate. The Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure 

[CJDT] has jurisdiction over all judges of the Court of Appeals and 

Superior Court and makes determinations as to whether a judge’s 

conduct warrants disciplinary action and whether involuntary retirement of a judge for health reasons is warranted. In addition, 

the CJDT conducts evaluations of judges seeking reappointment 

and judges who retire and wish to continue service as a senior 

judge. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $585,000 as a Federal payment for 

the judicial commissions, of which $275,000 is designated for the 

Judicial Nomination Commission and $310,000 is designated for 

the Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure. This amount 

is the same as the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and the budget 

request. Funds shall remain available until September 30, 2018. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $45,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 43,200,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 45,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

As authorized by Scholarships for Opportunity and Results Act 

(SOAR Act) and as part of a three-part comprehensive funding 

strategy, the District of Columbia receives funds for District of Columbia Public Schools, Public Charter Schools and Opportunity 

Scholarships. The intent of this comprehensive funding approach 

was to ensure progress and improvement of DCPS and public charter schools, while ensuring continued funding to support the Opportunity Scholarship Program for students to attend private schools. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $45,000,000 

for school improvement which is the same as the fiscal year 2016 

enacted level and $1,800,000 above the budget request. These 

funds are allocated as follows: $15,000,000 for District of Columbia 
71 

Public Schools, $15,000,000 for Public Charter Schools and 

$15,000,000 for Opportunity Scholarships. 

The Administration proposed and the recommendation provides 

$3,200,000, within the total provided, for the administrative, parental assistance, student academic assistance, and evaluation 

costs of the opportunity scholarship program. The level of funding 

for these activities is above the levels authorized by SOAR. However, the Committee supports the Administration’s request and believes that it is critical that additional funding be provided to effectively administer the program, to increase parental assistance and 

outreach, and to provide academic assistance to students. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR THE D.C. NATIONAL GUARD

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $435,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 450,000 

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

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Major General David F. Wherley, Jr. District of Columbia 

National Guard Retention and College Access Program provides 

tuition assistance for nonresident District of Columbia National 

Guard members. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $450,000 for 

the D.C. National Guard designated for the Major General David 

F. Wherley, Jr. District of Columbia National Guard Retention and 

College Access Program. This amount is $15,000 above the fiscal 

year 2016 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR HIV/AIDS PREVENTION

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $5,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Based on the national HIV/AIDS case based reporting system, 

the District has among the highest AIDS diagnosis rates in the 

country. Currently, 2.5 percent of the population was diagnosed 

and is living with HIV. The District has established an evidencebased strategy of expanding routine HIV screening and early diagnosis, linkage and retention into care and treatment and population-level interventions that achieve large prevention impact. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation includes a Federal payment of 

$5,000,000 to support testing and treatment of HIV/AIDS. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR THE FEDERAL CITY SHELTER

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... $9,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 
72 

The budget requests a new special Federal payment to redevelop 

a homeless shelter in the District of Columbia. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee is unable to support the request for a new special 

Federal payment to the District of Columbia. The Federal City 

Shelter, operated by the Community for Creative Non-Violence, is 

owned by the District and maintained by the DC Department of 

General Services. The Committee notes that both the Office of the 

Mayor and the Council of the District of Columbia are working on 

comprehensive plans to overhaul the shelters in the District of Columbia and that both local funds and other Federal funding sources 

may be available to address housing needs. 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FUNDS

The Committee recommends, for the operating expenses of the 

District of Columbia, the amount as set forth in the enrolled 

version of the Fiscal Year 2017 Budget Request Act of 2016, District of Columbia Bill 21–668, as may be amended. 

Budget Autonomy.—The Founding Fathers recognized the importance of establishing a seat for the Federal Government. Accordingly, article I, section 8 of the Constitution provides that Congress 

exercises ‘‘exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever’’ in the District of Columbia. The Supreme Court has held in the case of 

Palmore v. United States that this clause vests Congress with ‘‘plenary’’ authority to exercise powers to legislate for all matters in the 

District. Pursuant to this Constitutional power, Congress enacted 

the District of Columbia Home Rule Act in 1973. The District government holds only the powers that Congress granted it through 

the Home Rule Act. Though that act granted the District substantial powers of local self-government, it expressly preserved Congressional authority to review and affirmatively approve all District obligations and expenditures. The Home Rule Act did not 

grant the Government of the District of Columbia authority to 

change the longstanding process through which the District Government transmits its budget request to the President for submission to Congress, with all amounts—local or otherwise—becoming 

available for obligation or expenditure only in accordance with an 

act of Congress. Indeed, section 603 of the Home Rule Act explicitly 

provided that the act made ‘‘no change in existing law, regulation, 

or basic procedure and practice relating to the respective roles of 

the Congress, the President, the Federal Office of Management and 

Budget, and the Comptroller General of the United States in the 

preparation, review, submission, examination, authorization, and 

appropriation of the total budget of the District of Columbia Government.’’ Because section 603 is not part of the District Charter, 

it cannot be amended by the District Council or voters. The President acknowledges that only an act of Congress may change the 

District’s budget process, as his budget submissions over the past 

several years have included language requesting that Congress 

enact legislation in this area. The President even included such 

language in his fiscal year 2015, 2016, and 2017 budgets, all of 

which he submitted after the District purported to pass its Budget 
73 

Autonomy Act, suggesting that the President believes the District 

lacked authority to pass the act and that it was, therefore, ineffective. Furthermore, the Budget Autonomy Act had no effect on the 

applicability of the Antideficiency Act (31 U.S.C. 1341), which bars 

‘‘an officer or employee of the United States Government or of the 

District of Columbia government’’ from incurring obligations or 

making expenditures that exceed the amount appropriated by law. 
(74) 

TITLE V 

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $3,100,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 3,200,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,100,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Administrative Conference of the United States [ACUS] is 

an independent agency and advisory committee created to study 

administrative processes in order to recommend improvements to 

Congress and agencies. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,100,000 for ACUS for fiscal year 

2017. 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $250,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 330,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 250,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC] was established as an independent agency by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 1389; 7 U.S.C. 4a). The Commission administers the Commodity Exchange Act, 7 U.S.C. section 

1, et seq. 

The CFTC oversees our Nation’s futures, options and swaps markets. The Commission’s mission is to foster transparent, open, competitive and financially sound derivatives markets. Effective oversight by the CFTC protects market participants from fraud, manipulation and abusive practices, and protects the public and our economy from systemic risk related to derivatives. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $250,000,000 for 

the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The Committee recommendation includes $50,000,000 for the 

purchase of information technology. The Committee highlights the 
75 

crucial need for the CFTC to make mission-critical investments in 

technology to sort through the vast volume of data and information 

generated daily by markets. The CFTC’s responsibilities to conduct 

effective oversight and analysis of the swaps and futures markets 

requires greater attention to and investments in its information 

technology systems. 

The Committee recommendation for fiscal year 2017 includes 

$3,000,000 for the OIG. Of this amount, not more than $479,900 

should be for overhead expenses. 

Spending Plan.—The Committee directs the CFTC to submit, 

within 30 days of enactment, a detailed spending plan for the allocation of the funds made available, displayed by discrete program, 

project, and activity, including staffing projections, specifying both 

FTEs and contractors, and planned investments in information 

technology. 

The Committee remains concerned that the CFTC has made 

long-term budgetary and leasing decisions based on the agency’s requested budget level rather than on its enacted appropriation. 

Given the agency’s budget request has far exceeded the appropriated amount it received in recent years, the CFTC Inspector 

General has criticized the agency for allowing ‘‘hope to trump experience’’ in long-term budgeting decisions. 

Leasing Practices.—The Committee is deeply concerned with the 

leasing practices of the CFTC. The Government Accountability Office [GAO] ruled in February that the CFTC failed to properly 

record its lease obligations in violation of the recording statute, 31 

U.S.C. 1501(a)(1), which is expected to result in the CFTC reporting an Antideficiency Act violation. This is particularly troubling 

given similar violations at the Securities and Exchange Commission were brought to light in 2011, yet CFTC leadership failed to 

correct these problems. Moreover, GAO released a study in April 

that documented the Commission’s failure to make lease procurement decisions that were cost-effective and consistent with internal 

control standards. The CFTC Inspector General estimates that the 

Commission will spend between $44,700,000 and $56,600,000 on 

empty office space over the terms of its current leases. Given the 

agency’s recurring appeals for additional funding, the Committee 

remains concerned that a significant amount of taxpayer money 

that could otherwise be used to protect investors and ensure our 

markets are free from fraud, manipulation and other abuses is instead spent on unneeded office space. The Committee expects the 

CFTC to work through GSA on future lease agreements and renewals. 

Collective Bargaining Agreements.—The Committee is aware of 

negotiations at the Commission concerning a collective bargaining 

agreement for agency employees. The Anti-Deficiency Act requires 

that agencies ensure that the cost of agreements made in collective 

bargaining be constrained by the dollar limitations of their appropriations. As such, the Committee directs the CFTC to not increase 

agency personnel or benefit costs through excessive hiring or collective bargaining agreement negotiations that would result in furloughs, reductions-in-force, or a hiring freeze that could compromise the agency’s ability to carry out its mission of fostering 
76 

open and transparent markets and protecting market users from 

fraud, manipulation, and abusive practices. 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $125,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 130,500,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 124,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Consumer Product Safety Commission [CPSC] is an independent regulatory agency that was established on May 14, 1973, 

and is responsible for protecting the public against unreasonable 

risks of injury from consumer products; assisting consumers to 

evaluate the comparative safety of consumer products; developing 

uniform safety standards for consumer products and minimizing 

conflicting State and local regulations; and promoting research and 

investigation into the causes and prevention of product-related 

deaths, illnesses, and injuries. 

In carrying out its mandate, the CPSC establishes mandatory 

product safety standards, where appropriate, to reduce the unreasonable risk of injury to consumers from consumer products; helps 

industry develop voluntary safety standards; bans unsafe products 

if it finds that a safety standard is not feasible; monitors recalls of 

defective products; informs and educates consumers about product 

hazards; conducts research and develops test methods; collects and 

publishes injury and hazard data; and promotes uniform product 

regulations by governmental units. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $124,000,000 for the Consumer 

Product Safety Commission. This amount is $1,000,000 below the 

enacted level due to one-time costs provided in fiscal year 2016 for 

third-party test burden reduction. 

Flame Retardant Chemicals.—As the Commission considers new 

upholstered furniture flammability standards, the Committee encourages the Commission to take steps to reduce or limit the use 

of flame retardant chemicals pursuant to its consumer products 

safety rule authority (15 U.S.C. 2058). In 2012, the Commission released a study that indicates that flame retardant chemicals, as 

currently used in upholstered furniture foam, have no practical impact on flammability. 

Furniture Tip-Overs.—Furniture tip-overs, particularly televisions, remain a serious risk to children and consumers. The Committee encourages the Commission to continue to engage with industry, consumer groups, and the public to increase efforts to limit 

or mitigate the risk associated with furniture tip-overs. 

Recreational Off-highway Vehicles.—The Committee is encouraged by reports of significant positive engagement between CPSC 

and stakeholders regarding efforts to use the voluntary standard 

process to develop improved safety standards for recreational offhighway vehicles [ROVs] in lieu of mandatory standards through 

rulemaking. The Committee, however, remains concerned that 
77 

mandatory rulemaking regarding ROVs has not been terminated or 

removed from the Commission’s agenda. The Committee directs 

CPSC to submit a report within 60 days of enactment to the Committees on Appropriations detailing the status of the voluntary 

standards and the Commission’s intentions with respect to the 

mandatory rulemaking. 

Youth Sports Concussion.—Within 180 days of enactment, CPSC 

shall report to the Committee on voluntary industry standards and 

product labeling requirements for youth sports protective headgear 

and helmets, including Commission participation and Commission 

employee involvement in voluntary standards activities. 

Liquid Detergent Packets.—The Committee is aware of recent 

studies on children’s risk for poisoning due to liquid detergent 

packets and recognizes that recent voluntary recommendations 

adopted by industry are a positive step. The Committee encourages 

CPSC to continue its work with the standards-setting community 

to ensure adequate product standards, update them as necessary, 

and educate the public on appropriate product usage. 

ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $9,600,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 9,800,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 9,600,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Election Assistance Commission [EAC] was created by the 

Help America Vote Act of 2002 [HAVA] (Public Law 107–252) and 

is charged with implementing provisions of that act relating to the 

reform of Federal election administration. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides $9,600,000 for EAC’s administrative expenses, which is equal to the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The 

Committee bill requires that $1,500,000 of these funds be transferred to the National Institute for Standards and Technology 

[NIST] for technical assistance related to the development of voluntary State voting systems guidelines. 

Within 30 days of the transfer, the Director of NIST (or designee) 

shall provide to the Executive Director (or Acting) of the EAC and 

the Committee an expenditure plan for the funds that includes: (1) 

the number and position title and office of each staff person doing 

work and amount of time each staff person spends on that work; 

(2) the specific tasks accomplished including length of time needed 

to accomplish the task; (3) an explanation of expenditures, including contracts and grants, and use of the EAC funding transferred 

to NIST (including enumeration of funds); and (4) an explanation 

of how the work accomplished relates to mandated activities under 

HAVA. Finally, the Executive Director (or Acting) of the EAC and 

Director of NIST (or designee) shall work together to set priorities 

for the work outlined in order to meet timelines. 
78 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $384,012,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 358,286,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 341,315,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Communications Commission [FCC] is charged with 

regulating interstate and international communications by radio, 

television, wire, satellite, and cable. The FCC is also charged with 

promoting the safety of life and property through wire and radio 

communications. The mandate of the FCC under the Communications Act is to make available to all people of the United States a 

rapid, efficient, nationwide, and worldwide wire and radio communication service. The FCC performs five major functions to fulfill 

this charge: (1) spectrum allocation; (2) creating rules to promote 

fair competition and protect consumers where required by market 

conditions; (3) authorization of service; (4) enhancing public safety 

and homeland security; and (5) enforcement. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $341,315,000 for 

the Salaries and Expenses of the FCC for fiscal year 2017. Of this 

amount, the Committee dedicates $16,866,992 to moving expenses 

for the FCC’s expiring lease for its headquarters building that will 

be utilized to either relocate operations to a new facility with substantially reduced square footage and lower rental expenses or to 

significantly reduce the agency’s leased space at its current location 

and restack employees within the smaller footprint. Within 30 days 

of the end of each quarter, the FCC is directed to provide moving 

expenditure reports to the Committee with itemized amounts and 

descriptions of all moving expenditures. In recent years, the Commission has prioritized politically polarizing rulemaking at the expense of the agency’s mission-critical work. It is the Committee’s 

hope that the Commission will better allocate the resources it receives in fiscal year 2017 to more effectively fulfill the agency’s core 

responsibilities under the Communications Act. The total appropriation of $341,315,000 will be derived from offsetting collections. 

The Committee also recommends that up to $117,000,000 be retained from spectrum auction activities to fund the administrative 

expenses of conducting such auctions. 

The Committee has included language (section 501) to extend 

FCC’s exemption from the Anti-deficiency Act [ADA] until December 31, 2018. 

The Committee has included language (section 502) that prohibits the FCC from enacting certain recommendations regarding 

universal service that were made by the Joint Board of FCC members and State utility commissioners. 

Joint Sales Agreements.—On May 25, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit vacated the FCC’s March 31, 2014, 

order attributing, and thereby effectively prohibiting, most TV joint 

sales agreements [JSAs]. Last year, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 (Public Law 114–113), grandfathered existing TV 
79 

JSAs through September 30, 2025. The Committee is now including 

a provision in title VI to reiterate Congress’ strong support for the 

continuing operation of existing TV JSAs, regardless of the assignment or transfer of the stations involved in those agreements, and 

strongly opposes any new Commission action to attribute JSAs. 

Incentive Auction.—The Committee is gravely concerned with the 

impact the incentive auction will have on television broadcasters 

required to relocate during the repacking process. The Middle Class 

Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Public Law 112–96) established the TV Broadcaster Relocation Fund into which 

$1,750,000,000 will be deposited to cover repacking costs associated 

with relocating broadcasters to new channel assignments. Despite 

assurances from the FCC that the Relocation Fund will cover 

broadcasters’ relocation expenses, the Committee remains concerned that $1,750,000,000 will be insufficient. The Committee is 

also concerned that the 39-month deadline for stations to be repacked following the auction will be insufficient. 

The Commission is directed to immediately notify the House and 

Senate Committees on Appropriations, the Senate Committee on 

Commerce, and the House Committee on Energy and Commerce 

should additional relocation funding be necessary or should problems arise in meeting the Commission’s transition deadline. 

Not later than 90 days after the completion of the forward auction or 30 days after enactment of this act, the Commission is directed to submit a preliminary auctions report to the Committee. 

The report should include but not be limited to information relating 

to how many broadcast television stations have submitted reimbursement forms; the aggregate amount of reimbursements requested from the TV Broadcaster Relocation Fund; an estimate of 

what resources are available to reimburse costs; how many television stations will be required to relocate to a new channel assignment; and the status of spectrum coordination with Canada and 

Mexico. 

Not later than 240 days after the completion of the forward auction, the Commission is directed to submit to the Committee another report that includes but is not limited to information relating 

to the construction schedule for relocating television stations; 

whether broadcast television viewers will face any service disruptions from new channel assignments; and an estimate of the impact 

the repacking process on rural areas and television broadcast 

translator services. 

ATSC 3.0.—As a result of the spectrum incentive auction, numerous television broadcast stations will be required to move to 

newly designated channel assignments that could require the purchase of new antennas, transmitters, transmission lines, and other 

facilities. Separately, the Advanced Television Systems Committee 

is moving forward with an innovative, next-generation Internet 

protocol-based broadcast standard [ATSC 3.0], and will be filing a 

petition with the Commission to approve this new standard. ATSC 

3.0 equipment is expected to be commercially available in time for 

the repacking required by the spectrum incentive auction. The 

Committee urges the Commission to move forward with the ATSC 

3.0 standard as expeditiously as possible so that TV broadcasters 
80 

may purchase the facilities they need without wasting limited 

funds on outdated, unnecessary equipment. 

Wireless Support.—The Committee includes a provision that 

would provide certainty to rural wireless broadband users and carriers across the Nation as the Federal Communications Commission continues to develop a new framework for parts of the Universal Service Fund. The provision reaffirms the intent of current 

regulations adopted by the Commission (47 CFR 54.307(e)(5) and 

(e)(6)) that provide that competitive eligible telecommunications 

carriers will continue to receive reliable support until Mobility 

Fund Phase II is implemented. The Committee preserves the Commission’s flexibility to develop nationwide replacement mechanisms 

for high-cost support, which could include Mobility Fund Phase II, 

another support mechanism, or set of support mechanisms and a 

separate but complementary Alaska-specific support mechanism. 

The Committee does not intend that this section will limit the 

Commission’s consideration, development, or adoption of a replacement mechanism other than Mobility Fund Phase II or a separate 

Alaska-specific support mechanism. 

Enhanced Underwriting Announcements.—The Committee understands that in the current economic environment, Non-Commercial 

Educational [NCE] Public Interest Obligation [PIO] license holders 

are facing financial challenges and looking for new and efficient 

ways of operating. It is important to ensure that NCE PIO standards for enhanced underwriting announcements are applied uniformly for all such stations. Therefore, the Committee encourages 

the FCC to work with all broadcasters to consider their intent 

when reviewing and interpreting the NCE PIO guidelines and to 

provide parity in treatment to all stations. 

Call Completion in Rural Areas.—The FCC shall report to the 

Committee within 90 days of enactment of this act detailing the 

Commission’s efforts to resolve call completion issues and to prevent discriminatory delivery of calls to any area of the country. The 

report shall include information on the number of call completion 

complaints filed with the Commission in the previous 12 months 

and on the Commission’s resulting enforcement actions. 

Universal Service Reform.—The Committee remains concerned 

regarding waste, fraud, and abuse within the Universal Service 

Fund. The Committee encourages the FCC to continue prioritizing 

the expansion of broadband availability in unserved rural areas 

through the Connect America Fund. 

Drive Testing.—The Committee directs the FCC to conduct a feasibility study of conducting mobile broadband coverage drive testing in rural areas. The Commission is directed to report the results 

of the study to the Committee within 180 days of enactment. 

Broadband Connectivity on Tribal Lands.—The Committee remains concerned about the lack of access to broadband services on 

tribal lands. American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian communities face significant obstacles to the deployment of 

broadband infrastructure, including high buildout costs, limited financial resources that deter investment by commercial providers, 

and a lack of technical training and expertise within many such 

communities to undertake deployment and adoption planning. 

Sixty-eight percent of residents on rural, tribal lands lack access to 
81 

fixed broadband service, which is seven times worse than the national average. The Committee directs the Commission to set interim goals and performance measures for increasing access to 

broadband on tribal lands, and directs $500,000 to support consultation with federally recognized Indian tribes, Alaska Native villages, and entities related to Hawaiian home lands. 

National Broadband Map.—The Committee is concerned that the 

data the FCC makes available in the National Broadband Map 

may not be fully accurate, complete, and reliable. Accordingly, the 

Committee directs the FCC to report to Congress on the actions the 

FCC plans to take to address the current limitations of the data 

in the National Broadband Map or any successor maps. 

Consumer Complaints Database.—The Committee encourages the 

FCC to analyze information from the consumer complaints database to identify potential enforcement actions and/or changes to 

current FCC policies. 

Electronic Comment Filing System.—The FCC’s Electronic Comment Filing System [EFCS] serves as the repository for official 

records in the FCC’s docketed proceedings and rulemakings from 

1992 to the present. Although it is intended to allow consumers to 

research, retrieve, view, and print any document in the system, 

EFCS is cumbersome and difficult to use. The Committee encourages the FCC to modernize EFCS as part of its overall information 

technology reform efforts. 

Commission Transparency.—The Committee directs the FCC to 

identify any changes made to an item after its adoption by the 

Commission, at the time such item is published. 

Coordination on Rural Communications Services.—The Committee recognizes the FCC’s vital role in preserving and advancing 

universal communications services. The Committee encourages the 

FCC to coordinate efforts with the Rural Utility Service to optimize 

the use of limited resources and promote broadband deployment in 

rural America. 

Information Technology Reform.—The Committee directs the 

Commission to report to the Committee within 6 months on how 

it will prioritize future IT reform efforts and identify the most important IT systems to be modernized. 

Connect America Fund II Accountability.—As the Connect America Fund [CAF–II] is implemented, it is important to the Committee that taxpayer dollars are used effectively and efficiently to 

make broadband service available in communities that currently 

lack it. The Committee requests that the Commission regularly update Congress on the new broadband service made through CAF– 

II and on the Commission’s oversight efforts to make sure that providers receiving CAF–II funds are compliant with relevant program 

regulations and policies. The Commission’s updates should include 

information about the effectiveness of the FCC Form 477, which requires broadband providers to self-report data about where they 

offer broadband service, and whether improvements to the Form 

477 or to the Commission’s oversight of the CAF–II program are 

necessary to ensure that taxpayer dollars are used effectively and 

efficiently. 
82 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $34,568,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 35,958,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 35,958,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation [FDIC] Office of Inspector General [OIG] conducts audits, investigations, and other reviews to assist and augment the FDIC’s contribution to the stability of, and public confidence in, the Nation’s financial system. A 

separate appropriation more effectively ensures the OIG’s independence consistent with the Inspector General Act of 1978 and 

other legislation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $35,958,000 for the FDIC inspector 

general, the same as the budget request and $1,390,000 more than 

the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. Funds are to be derived from the 

Deposit Insurance Fund and the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation resolution fund. 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $76,119,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 80,540,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 79,119,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Election Commission [FEC] was created through the 

1974 Amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 

(Public Law 93–443). Consistent with its duty of executing our Nation’s Federal campaign finance laws, and in pursuit of its mission 

of maintaining public faith in the integrity of the Federal campaign 

finance system, the FEC conducts three major regulatory programs: (1) providing public disclosure of funds raised and spent to 

influence Federal elections; (2) enforcing compliance with restrictions on contributions and expenditures made to influence Federal 

elections; and (3) administering public financing of Presidential 

campaigns. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $79,119,000 for the Federal Election 

Commission. The recommendation includes $8,000,000 to cover expenses associated with the expiration of the FEC’s lease. 

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $26,200,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 27,062,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 26,200,000 
83 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Labor Relations Authority [FLRA] is an independent 

administrative Federal agency created by title VII of the Civil 

Service Reform Act of 1978 (Public Law 95–454) with a mission to 

carry out five statutory responsibilities in relation to the Federal 

workforce: (1) determining the appropriateness of units for labor organization representation; (2) resolving complaints of unfair labor 

practices; (3) adjudicating exceptions to arbitrator’s awards; (4) adjudicating legal issues relating to the duty to bargain; and (5) resolving impasses during negotiations. 

The FLRA’s authority is divided by law and by delegation among 

a three-member authority and an Office of General Counsel, appointed by the President and subject to Senate confirmation; and 

the Federal Service Impasses Panel, which consists of seven parttime members appointed by the President. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,200,000 for 

the Federal Labor Relations Authority. 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $306,900,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 342,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 306,900,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Trade Commission [FTC] administers a variety of 

Federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. Activities in the 

antitrust area include detection and elimination of illegal collusion, 

anticompetitive mergers, unlawful single-firm conduct, and injurious vertical agreements. The FTC enforces consumer protection 

laws involving advertising, marketing, and financial practices; 

fights consumer fraud; and addresses privacy and identity protection concerns. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $306,900,000 for the 

salaries and expenses of the FTC for fiscal year 2017. 

The Congressional Budget Office estimates $125,000,000 of collections from Hart-Scott-Rodino premerger filing fees and 

$15,000,000 of collections from Do-Not-Call fees will partially offset 

the appropriation requirement for this account. The total amount 

of direct appropriations for this account is therefore $166,900,000. 

The Committee recognizes the FTC’s mission to preserve competition in the marketplace and protect consumers, including efforts to improve the security of consumer financial transactions. 

The recommended funding will support these necessary endeavors. 

The recommendation includes funding for the FTC Do-Not-Call initiative, of which the entire amount is to be derived from the collection of fees. 
84 

Sports Concussion.—According to the Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention, a concussion is a type of traumatic brain injury 

that can occur in any sport or recreation activity. 

Given the potential for real injury to children, the Committee encourages the FTC to remain vigilant in its enforcement efforts 

against potential unfair and deceptive practices related to sports 

concussion. The FTC should review any National Academies’ report 

on sports-related concussions in youth for any matter that may inform efforts to protect consumers from unfair or deceptive practices 

in or affecting commerce. 

Contact Lenses.—The Committee is aware of the FTC’s ongoing 

review of its contact lens rule and encourages the agency to consider modifications that prioritize patient safety and strengthen enforcement mechanisms aimed at combating illegal sales of contact 

lenses based on expired or non-existent prescriptions, while coordinating with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to disseminate contact lens safety information to consumers. 

Agency Overlap.—The Committee is aware that on March 12, 

2015, the FTC and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau [CFPB] 

reauthorized their ongoing Memorandum of Understanding designed to facilitate interagency coordination on efforts to protect 

consumers. The Committee directs the FTC to continue to maximize efficiencies and avoid duplication of Federal law enforcement 

and regulatory efforts. 

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The General Services Administration [GSA] was established by 

the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (Public Law 81–152) when Congress mandated the consolidation of the 

Federal Government’s real property and administrative services. 

GSA is organized into the Public Buildings Service, the Federal Acquisition Service, the Office of Governmentwide Policy, and the Office of Citizen Services. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

FBI Headquarters Consolidation.—The Committee supports full 

consolidation of the Federal Bureau of Investigations [FBI] headquarters to better support its mission and is concerned about further delays in the execution of the FBI headquarters project. The 

Committee expects GSA to adhere to the timeline finalized on January 22, 2016. GSA is directed to move forward in a transparent 

manner. GSA is directed to notify the Committee immediately 

should problems arise in meeting the established schedule. 

Land Border Partnerships.—The Committee remains concerned 

that GSA is not taking effective steps to improve review practices 

and responsiveness with respect to enter into donation or gift 

agreements with interested parties in the border region. The Committee is concerned that if GSA does not improve review practices 

and responsiveness, a significant opportunity to demonstrate that 

this authority can deliver results will have been missed and future 

interest from non-Federal entities in improving land border infrastructure will be effectively discouraged. Not more than 60 days 
85 

after the date of enactment, GSA is directed to report, after consultation with relevant Federal agencies, on proposed steps to 

strengthen and improve the review process, including imposition of 

specific deadlines for inter-agency reviews and response to pending 

proposals, and incorporation of an evaluation process for assessing 

impacts to non-Federal stakeholders and international trading 

partners, for donation proposals under the provisions of the relevant provisions of section 559 of division F of Public Law 113–76, 

as amended, as well as the traditional gift acceptance process provided for under 40 U.S.C. 3175. GSA is also directed to submit a 

detailed list of donation and gift proposals for land border ports 

currently under review, and provide a status report on each proposal. 

Data Center Consolidation.—The Federal Data Center Consolidation Initiative was launched in 2010 to reduce the cost and footprint of government data centers and increase IT security. The new 

Data Center Optimization Initiative continues to encourage agencies to reduce data centers and utilize cloud-based services where 

possible. Given budget constraints and limited IT funding, data 

center consolidation and optimization continues to present significant savings opportunities to curb spending on underutilized infrastructure. The National Center for Critical Information Processing 

and Storage [NCCIPS] is a shared service, multi-tenant Federal 

data facility that was established to consolidate efforts across Federal agencies to store and secure data. During the Federal Data 

Center Consolidation Initiative, GSA utilized available infrastructure at NCCIPS to consolidate multiple systems and reduce legacy 

costs. The Committee directs GSA to continue taking advantage of 

consolidation efforts to more rapidly achieve IT modernization that 

results in significant cost savings and a reduced carbon footprint 

for GSA’s computing environment. 

Sustainable Roofing Systems.—The Committee recognizes the importance of providing energy efficient, sustainable, and cost effective measures that address more effectively the infrastructure 

needs of Federal agencies. GSA should continue to develop sustainable roofing systems that minimize the burden on the environment, 

reduce costs, conserve energy, and extend the useful life of roof assets. 

Transportation Technology.—The Committee directs the General 

Services Administration to complete an assessment of transportation technologies for those Federal vehicle fleets operated by or 

leased from the General Services Administration and submit a report to the Committee that describes, for each vehicle fleet: (1) 

which types of transportation technology the agency uses that 

could be converted to electric transportation technology without increasing costs to taxpayers; (2) an estimate of how many such plugin electric drive vehicles could be deployed by the General Services 

Administration and each leasing Federal agency by 2020; and (3) 

the estimated net cost to the General Services Administration and 

each leasing Federal agency. 

Consolidation Activities.—The Committee is concerned that some 

consolidation activities by GSA could negatively impact Federal 

agencies with field-based agencies and outreach programs when 

two or more agencies are co-located at the same county service cen-
86 

ter. In those cases, GSA shall take client agencies’ missions and 

the importance of ease of access by customers into consideration 

when making decisions about office relocations. 

Landscaping Requirements.—The GSA should report to the Committee not later than 120 days after enactment on compliance with 

the Federal Acquisition Regulation [FAR] on Sustainable Acquisition Policy (Part 23 et seq.) for landscaping contracts and its plans 

to continue compliance in fiscal year 2017. 

Regional Headquarters.—GSA is directed to review and report to 

the Committee on the potential savings that could be achieved by 

the relocation of regional headquarters within the New England region from high-cost urban centers to lower-cost urban centers. The 

review should include locations in each State in the region and 

should solicit input from relevant state agencies in choosing locations for evaluation. 

FEDERAL BUILDINGS FUND—LIMITATIONS ON AVAILABILITY OF

REVENUE

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Limitation on availability of revenue: 

Limitation on availability, 2016 .................................................... $10,196,124,000 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2017 ....................... 10,178,338,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 9,377,869,000 

The Federal Buildings Fund [FBF] finances the activities of the 

Public Buildings Service, which provides space and services for 

Federal agencies in a relationship similar to that of landlord and 

tenant. The FBF, established in 1975, replaces direct appropriations by using income derived from rent assessments, which approximate commercial rates for comparable space and services. The 

Committee makes funds available through a process of placing limitations on obligations from the FBF as a way of allocating funds 

for various FBF activities. 

CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION

Limitation on availability, 2016 ........................................................... $1,607,738,000 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2017 .............................. 1,330,522,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 764,749,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The construction and acquisition fund finances the site, design, 

construction, management, and inspection costs of new Federal facilities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $764,749,000 for construction and acquisition in fiscal year 2017. 

The Committee recommendation includes full funding for the 

FBI Headquarters Consolidation Project and the Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service facility at the Pembina, North Dakota, 

U.S. Land Port of Entry, both of which were requested in the President’s fiscal year 2017 budget. 
87 

REPAIRS AND ALTERATIONS

Limitation on availability, 2016 ........................................................... $735,331,000 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2017 .............................. 841,617,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 632,539,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Under this activity, the General Services Administration [GSA] 

executes its responsibility for repairs and alterations [R&A] of both 

Government-owned and -leased facilities under the control of GSA. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $632,539,000 for repairs and alterations in fiscal year 2017. 

The Committee recommends $289,245,000 for major repairs and 

alterations projects, $301,594,000 for Basic Repairs and Alterations, $20,000,000 for the Fire and Life Safety Program, and 

$26,700,000 for the Judiciary Capital Security Program. 

RENTAL OF SPACE

Limitation on availability, 2016 ........................................................... $5,579,055,000 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2017 .............................. 5,655,581,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,645,581,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The rental of space program funds lease payments made to privately owned buildings, temporary space for Federal employees 

during major repair and alteration projects, and relocations from 

Federal buildings due to forced moves and relocations as a result 

of health and safety conditions. GSA is responsible for leasing general purpose space and land incident thereto for Federal agencies, 

except in cases where GSA has delegated its leasing authority. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $5,645,581,000 for 

rental of space. 

BUILDING OPERATIONS

Limitation on availability, 2016 ........................................................... $2,274,000,000 

Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2017 .............................. 2,350,618,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,335,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This activity provides for the operation of all Government-owned 

facilities under the jurisdiction of GSA and building services in 

GSA-leased space where the terms of the lease do not require the 

lessor to furnish such services. Services included in building operations are cleaning, protection, maintenance, payments for utilities 

and fuel, grounds maintenance, and elevator operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $2,335,000,000 for 

building operations. 
88 

GOVERNMENTWIDE POLICY

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $58,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 64,497,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 60,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Governmentwide Policy [OGP], working cooperatively with other agencies, provides the leadership needed to develop and evaluate policies associated with high-performance green 

buildings and real property, acquisition policy, personal property, 

travel and transportation management, vehicles and aircraft, committee and regulations management, and management of Federal 

spending data. OGP collaborates with partner agencies and other 

stakeholders to improve public access to policy information and 

support data, and improve transparency in Government. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $60,000,000 for 

Governmentwide Policy. Of the amount provided, GSA is directed 

to dedicate not less than $2,000,000 to establishing the Unified 

Shared Services Management Office. 

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $58,560,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 59,449,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 58,560,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Operating Expenses supports a variety of operational activities 

which are not feasible or appropriate for a user fee arrangement. 

Major programs include the personal property utilization and donation activities of the Federal Acquisition Service; the real property 

utilization and disposal activities of the Public Buildings Service; 

the activities of the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals; and the 

Management and Administration activities, including support of 

Governmentwide emergency response and recovery activities, and 

top-level agency-wide management, administration, and communications activities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $58,560,000 for 

Operating Expenses. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $65,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 66,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 65,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides agency-wide audit and investigative 

functions to identify and correct management and administrative 

deficiencies within the General Services Administration [GSA], 

which create conditions for existing or potential instances of fraud, 
89 

waste, and mismanagement. The audit function provides internal 

audit and contract audit services. Contract audits provide professional advice to GSA contracting officials on accounting and financial matters relative to the negotiation, award, administration, repricing, and settlement of contracts. Internal audits review and 

evaluate all facets of GSA operations and programs, test internal 

control systems, and develop information to improve operating efficiencies and enhance customer services. The investigative function 

provides for the detection and investigation of improper and illegal 

activities involving GSA programs, personnel, and operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $65,000,000 for 

the Office of Inspector General. In addition, the Office of Inspector 

General has access to unobligated no-year funds that were appropriated in fiscal years 2014, 2015, and 2016. 

ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $3,277,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 3,865,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,865,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation currently provides pensions, office staffs, and 

related expenses for former Presidents Jimmy Carter, George H.W. 

Bush, William Clinton, and George W. Bush. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,865,000 for allowances and office 

staff for former Presidents. 

EXPENSES, PRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... $9,500,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 9,500,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

In accordance with the Presidential Transition Act of 1963, this 

appropriation will enable GSA to provide transition services, including office space, communications services, printing, and postage 

costs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,500,000 for 

presidential transition expenses, which is equal to the fiscal year 

2017 budget request. 
90 

FEDERAL CITIZEN SERVICES FUND

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $55,894,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 1 ......................................................................... 58,428,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 55,894,000 

1The budget includes funding for the E-Gov Fund under this account. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Citizen Services Fund provides for the salaries and 

expenses of the Office of Citizen Services and Innovative Technologies [OCSIT]. OCSIT provides the means for citizens, businesses, other governments, and the media to obtain information 

and services easily from the Government via the Web, email, printed media, and telephone. OCSIT leads several interagency groups 

to share best practices and develop strategies for improving the 

way Government provides services to the American public. 

The Federal Citizen Services [FCS] Fund is financed from annual 

appropriations to pay for the salaries and expenses of OCSIT staff 

and Citizens Services programs. Reimbursements from Federal 

agencies pay for the direct costs of information services OCSIT provides on their behalf. The FCS Fund also receives funding from 

user fees for publications ordered by the public, payments from private entities for services rendered, and gifts from the public. All income is available without regard to fiscal year limitations, but is 

subject to an annual aggregate expenditure limit as set forth in appropriation acts. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $55,894,000 for the Federal Citizen 

Services Fund. 

IT MODERNIZATION FUND

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget Request, 2017 ............................................................................ $100,000,000 

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

The budget requests the establishment of a new account, contingent upon enactment of authorizing legislation, to modernize information technology across the government. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Given little progress in enacting authorizing legislation necessary 

to establish this fund and persistent oversight and accountability 

concerns relating to shifting IT spending away from the appropriations process, the Committee does not provide funding for this account and encourages OMB to work with Federal agencies, as appropriate, to include proposals to retire legacy IT systems in agencies’ respective fiscal year 2018 budget requests. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Section 510 authorizes GSA to use funds for the hire of passenger motor vehicles. 
91 

Section 511 authorizes GSA to transfer funds within the Federal 

buildings fund to meet program requirements. 

Section 512 requires that the fiscal year 2018 budget request 

meet certain standards. 

Section 513 provides that no funds may be used to increase the 

amount of occupiable square feet, provide cleaning services, security enhancements, or any other service usually provided, to any 

agency which does not pay the requested rate. 

Section 514 continues the provision that permits GSA to pay small claims less than $250,000 made against the Government. 

Section 515 provides that certain lease agreements must conform 

to an approved prospectus. 

Section 516 requires a GSA spending plan for certain accounts 

and programs. 

HARRY S TRUMAN SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $1,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation is an independent 

agency established by Congress in 1975 (Public Law 93–642) to encourage exceptional college students to pursue careers in public 

service through the Truman Scholarship program. The Truman 

Scholarship is a merit-based award available to college juniors who 

plan to pursue careers in Government or elsewhere in public service. 

The Foundation Trust Fund was established with a one-time 

$30,000,000 appropriation in 1976. The authorizing legislation directed that this endowment be invested solely in U.S. Treasury Securities, the interest from which has funded the Foundation’s operating budget. With the decline in interest rates, the annual yield 

from the trust fund has declined by 63 percent over the past decade. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000 for 

the Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation. 

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $46,835,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 47,428,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 46,835,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Merit Systems Protection Board [MSPB] was established by 

the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. MSPB is an independent 

quasi-judicial agency manifested to protect Federal merit systems 
92 

against partisan political and other prohibited personnel practices 

and to ensure adequate protection for employees against abuses by 

agency management. 

MSPB assists Federal agencies in running a merit-based civil 

service system. This is accomplished on a case-by-case basis 

through hearing and deciding employee appeals and on a systemic 

basis by reviewing significant actions and regulations of the Office 

of Personnel Management [OPM] and conducting studies of the 

civil service and other merit systems. The intended results of 

MSPB’s efforts are to assure that personnel actions taken against 

employees are processed within the law and that actions taken by 

OPM and other agencies support and enhance Federal merit principles. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $46,835,000 for 

the MSPB. The recommendation includes not more than $2,345,000 

for adjudicating retirement appeals through an appropriation from 

the trust fund consistent with past practice. 

MORRIS K. UDALL AND STEWART L. UDALL FOUNDATION

MORRIS K. UDALL AND STEWART L. UDALL TRUST FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $1,995,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 1,895,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,895,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The General Fund payment to the Morris K. Udall and Stewart 

L. Udall Trust Fund is invested in Treasury securities with maturities suitable to the needs of the Fund. Interest earnings from the 

investments are used to carry out the activities of the Morris K. 

Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation. The Foundation awards 

scholarships, fellowships, and grants, and funds activities of the 

Udall Center. 

The Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation also supports training programs for professionals in health care policy and 

public policy, such as the Native Nations Institute [NNI]. NNI, 

based at the University of Arizona, provides Native Americans with 

leadership and management training, and analyzes policies relevant to tribes. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,895,000 for 

the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Trust Fund. 

The Committee appreciates the progress made by the Udall 

Foundation to strengthen its internal controls related to contract 

oversight and personnel management. The Committee directs the 

Foundation to report semiannually to the Committee regarding its 

continued work in instituting reformed internal controls, including 

milestones achieved. Finally, the Committee provides that $200,000 

shall be transferred to the Inspector General of the Department of 
93 

the Interior to conduct annual audits and investigations of the 

Foundation and submit reports of its findings to the Committee in 

order to ensure that the Foundation’s spending, management, and 

other activities are subject to regular oversight and review. 

ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION FUND

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $3,400,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 3,249,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,249,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution is a 

Federal program established by Public Law 105–156 to assist parties in resolving environmental, natural resource, and public lands 

conflicts. The Institute is part of the Morris K. Udall and Stewart 

L. Udall Foundation and serves as an impartial, nonpartisan institution providing professional expertise, services, and resources to 

all parties involved in such disputes. The Institute helps parties determine whether collaborative problem solving is appropriate for 

specific environmental conflicts, how and when to bring all the parties together for discussion, and whether a third-party facilitator or 

mediator might be helpful in assisting the parties in their efforts 

to reach consensus or to resolve the conflict. In addition, the Institute maintains a roster of qualified facilitators and mediators with 

substantial experience in environmental conflict resolution and can 

help parties in selecting an appropriate neutral professional. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,249,000 for 

the Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund. 

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION

The National Archives and Records Administration [NARA] is 

the national recordkeeper, managing the Government’s archives 

and records, and operating the Presidential libraries. NARA is an 

independent agency created by statute in 1934 and tasked with the 

unique mission to identify, access, protect, preserve, and make 

available for use the important documents and records of all three 

branches of the Federal Government. NARA administers the Information Security Oversight Office, is the publisher of the Federal 

Register, and makes grants for historical documentation through 

the National Historical Publications and Records Commission. In 

addition, NARA is charged with additional responsibilities including mediating Freedom of Information Act disputes and coordinating controlled unclassified information. 

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $379,393,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 380,634,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 380,634,000 
94 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides for basic operations dealing with management of the Federal Government’s archives and records, operation 

of Presidential libraries, review for declassification of classified security information, and other duties. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $380,634,000 for operating expenses 

of the National Archives and Records Administration for fiscal year 

2017. This amount is $1,241,000 above the fiscal year 2016 enacted 

level and the same as the budget request. 

The Committee’s recommendation supports initiatives to 

strengthen NARA’s record management leadership role; address archival storage needs; continue to develop, build, and expand the IT 

infrastructure to conduct the business of the National Declassification Center established in Executive Order 13526; operate and 

maintain the Electronic Records Archive [ERA]; and improve research room holdings protection. 

The Committee notes that security of NARA’s collections and 

holdings has been identified as a material weakness by the Archivist and cited as a management challenge by the Inspector General. The Committee directs and expects NARA to institute, maintain, and enforce effective inventory controls and adequate levels of 

security within its facilities to reduce the risk of loss, damage, or 

destruction of irreplaceable historic documents and artifacts. 

The Committee believes that providing reliable access to electronic records far into the future, regardless of advancements in 

technology, is of utmost importance. The Committee strongly urges 

NARA, as it operates and maintains the ERA, to ensure effective 

and efficient preservation, appraisal, scheduling, and routine transfer of electronic records by Federal agencies. The Committee expects NARA to prioritize its efforts to accelerate user adoption of 

the ERA system, including providing instructional guidance and 

training materials. 

The Committee continues to encourage NARA to digitize and 

post online archival records that are relocated as a result of a facility closure. The Committee directs NARA to report, within 90 days 

of enactment, on its progress to digitize and preserve physical access to archival records that have been or will be relocated to another State by any facility closure occurring in fiscal years 2014, 

2015, or 2016. The report shall: (1) describe the progress that has 

been made to digitize and post online such records that have been 

moved; (2) describe NARA’s digitization priorities for 2017 pertaining to any relocated archival records; and (3) include a timeline 

for completing the digitization and posting online process. The 

Committee further directs NARA to give due consideration and appropriate adjudication, within the limits of the Federal Records Act 

and all applicable laws, of any request to review archival records 

that are relocated as a result of a facility closure, to determine 

whether those records continue to require permanent preservation 

in the National Archives. 

Recordkeeping.—The Committee remains concerned about the 

ability of Federal agencies to effectively manage email and other 
95 

electronic Federal records so that essential records are available 

when required by Congress in order to fulfill its oversight responsibilities. The executive branch must assure the American public 

that records documenting Government decisions and actions are retained for the appropriate time period and can be retrieved and 

provided to Congress in a timely manner and as required by law. 

The Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments of 2014 

(Public Law 113–187) modernized the Federal records management 

statutes to include emails and electronic records and to reinforce 

that the executive branch must manage these records with greater 

care and stewardship than what has been observed in recent 

months and years. 

The Committee notes that NARA has made significant progress 

in issuing guidance directing executive branch agencies to manage 

electronic Federal records, including email records, as required by 

law. The Committee expects NARA to incorporate email recordkeeping standards into its inspections of other agencies’ records 

management programs, with special emphasis on personal and 

alias email accounts used for conducting official business. The 

Committee also notes that NARA has received additional resources 

to increase oversight over executive branch compliance with Federal recordkeeping laws. The Committee directs NARA to continue 

to place a high priority on its recordkeeping oversight mission and 

to report to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate, the House Committee on Oversight 

and Government Reform, and the Senate Committee on Homeland 

Security and Governmental Affairs any instances of substantial 

non-compliance by executive agencies or significant risk to Federal 

records that are identified in the course of NARA oversight activities. 

Office of Government Information Services.—The Committee remains interested in the ability the Office of Government Information Services [OGIS] to reduce Federal expenditures on processing 

document requests and resolving Freedom of Information Act 

[FOIA] disputes. The Committee directs the National Archives and 

Records Administration to report not less than 60 days from the 

enactment of this act on the specific allocation of appropriated 

funds to OGIS in fiscal year 2017, and the level of services this allocated amount will support. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $4,180,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 4,801,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,801,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The mission of the Office of Inspector General [OIG] is to ensure 

that NARA safeguards and preserves the records of our Government while providing the American people with access to the essential documentation of their rights and the actions of their Government. The OIG accomplishes this by combating fraud, waste, and 

abuse through high-quality objective audits and investigations covering all aspects of agency operations at facilities nationwide. The 
96 

OIG also serves as an independent, internal advocate for the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of NARA and its operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $4,801,000 for the Office of Inspector General [OIG]. This amount is $621,000 above the fiscal year 

2016 enacted level and equal to the budget request. The Committee 

supports a distinct account for the OIG in order to clearly identify 

the resources necessary to staff and operate the expanding missioncritical oversight and accountability functions performed by the 

OIG to ensure responsible NARA stewardship over public records. 

REPAIRS AND RESTORATION

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $7,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 7,500,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 7,500,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides for the repair, alteration, and improvement 

of Archives facilities and Presidential libraries nationwide, and provides adequate storage for holdings. Funding made available will 

better enable NARA to maintain its facilities in proper condition 

for public visitors, researchers, and NARA employees, and also 

maintain the structural integrity of the buildings. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $7,500,000 for the repairs and restoration account. This amount is the same as the fiscal year 2016 

enacted level and equal to the budget request. 

The Committee appreciates NARA’s submission of an update of 

its comprehensive capital needs assessment for its entire infrastructure of Presidential libraries and records facilities, as part of 

the fiscal year 2017 budget submission and urges NARA to include 

an appropriate level of funding for repair of valuable historic Presidential libraries in the fiscal year 2018 budget request. 

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PUBLICATIONS AND RECORDS COMMISSION

GRANTS PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $5,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Historical Publications and Records Commission 

[NHPRC] provides grants nationwide to preserve and publish 

records that document American history. Administered within the 

National Archives, which preserves Federal records, NHPRC helps 

State, local, and private institutions preserve non-Federal records, 

helps publish the papers of major figures in American history, and 

helps archivists and records managers improve their techniques, 

training, and ability to serve a range of information users. Since 

1964, the NHPRC has funded nearly 5,000 projects at local government archives, colleges and universities, and other nonprofit insti-
97 

tutions to facilitate use of public records and other collections by 

scholars, family and local historians, journalists, documentary 

filmmakers, and many others. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission [NHPRC]. This amount 

is equal to the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and equal to the budget request. 

The Committee supports the central role the NHPRC program 

plays in the preservation and dissemination of the Nation’s documentary heritage and its success in leveraging private sector contributions. 

The Committee commends the National Archives and Records 

Administration and the National Historical Publications and 

Records Commission for their work to ensure the publication and 

recording of our Nation’s history. The Committee urges the National Historical Publications and Records Commission to continue 

to support the completion of documentary editions through the National Historical Publications and Records Commission Grants Program and to support the scholarly presentation of our country’s 

most treasured historical documents. 

The Committee notes that the funding provided will enable 

NARA, through the NHPRC, to undertake a variety of initiatives, 

including advancing archives preservation, access, and digitization 

projects within the interlocking repositories of historic records and 

hidden collections; ensuring public access to some of the most important historical resources that are maintained outside of Federal 

repositories; and digitizing nationally significant historic records 

collections to facilitate round-the-clock Internet availability. 

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVOLVING LOAN FUND

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $2,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 2,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Community Development Revolving Loan Fund [CDRLF] 

program was established in 1979 to assist officially designated 

‘‘low-income’’ credit unions in providing basic financial services to 

low-income communities. Low-interest loans and deposits are made 

available to assist these credit unions. Loans or deposits are normally repaid in 5 years, although shorter repayment periods may 

be considered. Technical assistance grants [TAGs] are also available to low-income credit unions for improving operations as well 

as addressing safety and soundness issues. Credit unions use TAG 

funds for specific initiatives, including taxpayer assistance, financial education, home ownership initiatives, and training assistance. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for technical assistance 

grants to community development credit unions. This funding level 
98 

is equal to the budget request and equal to the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. The Committee expects the CDRLF to continue making 

loans from available funds derived from repaid loans and interest 

earned on previous loans to designated credit unions. 

OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $15,742,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 16,090,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 16,090,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Government Ethics [OGE], a separate agency within the executive branch, was established by the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (Public Law 95–521). The OGE is charged by law 

to provide overall direction of executive branch policies designed to 

prevent conflicts of interest and ensure high ethical standards for 

executive branch employers. The OGE carries out these responsibilities by promulgating and maintaining enforceable standards of 

ethical conduct for nearly 2.7 million civilian employees in more 

than 130 executive branch agencies and the White House; overseeing a financial disclosure system that reaches 26,000 public and 

over 380,000 confidential financial disclosure report filers; ensuring 

that executive branch ethics programs are in compliance with applicable ethics laws and regulations; providing direct education and 

training products to more than 4,500 ethics officials executive 

branch-wide; conducting outreach to the general public, the private 

sector, and civil society; and providing technical assistance to, 

State, local, and foreign governments, and international organizations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,090,000 for 

salaries and expenses of the OGE in fiscal year 2017 in order to 

fully support agency efforts related to the Presidential transition. 

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF TRUST FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $120,688,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 144,867,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 120,688,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Personnel Management [OPM] was established by 

Public Law 95–454, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, enacted 

on October 13, 1978. OPM is responsible for management of Federal human resources policy and oversight of the merit civil service 

system. Although individual agencies are largely responsible for 

personnel operations, OPM provides a Governmentwide framework 

for human resources policy, advises and assists agencies (often on 

a reimbursable basis) with workforce planning and personnel mat-
99 

ters, and ensures that agency operations are consistent with requirements of law on issues such as veterans preference and merit 

system compliance. OPM oversees examination of applicants for 

employment in the competitive service; issues regulations and policies on recruitment, hiring, classification and pay, training, and 

other aspects of personnel management; and manages the process 

for personnel security and background checks for suitability and 

national security clearances. OPM is also responsible for administering the retirement, health benefits, and life insurance programs affecting most Federal employees, retired Federal employees, and their families and survivors. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a general fund appropriation of $120,688,000 for the salaries and expenses of the Office of Personnel Management. 

National Background Investigations Bureau.—In fiscal year 

2016, the Administration announced the transition of OPM’s background investigation work from Federal Investigative Services 

[FIS] to the National Background Investigations Bureau [NBIB]. 

NBIB was created to restructure the way OPM handles background 

investigations in the wake of the massive breach announced last 

year that exposed sensitive information on millions of current, 

former and prospective Federal employees, their family members, 

and other contacts. Under the planned structure, NBIB will be 

housed within OPM while security of background investigation 

data will be transferred to the Department of Defense. The Committee remains concerned about the overall plan for NBIB, particularly OPM’s role, and notes that the few details provided about 

NBIB have raised more questions than answers. Ultimately, the 

Committee is concerned that the creation of NBIB amounts to little 

more than a new name for FIS despite the need for more comprehensive reforms to the background investigations process, including determining whether OPM should continue to play a role 

in the process. The Committee directs GAO to monitor the development of NBIB and report to the Committees on Appropriations of 

the House and Senate not later than 6 months after enactment of 

this Act on the transition, operation, and oversight of NBIB. 

OPM’s IT Infrastructure.—The Administration’s decision to create a new IT environment within DOD to secure background investigation data exhibits a lack of confidence both in OPM’s current 

IT systems and the agency’s ability to implement sufficient reforms. OPM continues to operate dual environments as it migrates 

from its existing legacy infrastructure to the Shell. In fiscal year 

2016, the Committee provided OPM an additional $21,000,000 for 

IT modernization. However, significant concerns remain relating to 

OPM’s capital planning practices, the agency’s procurement and 

management of contracts, and continued uncertainty surrounding 

the total cost of the modernization project. OPM’s IG recently reported that ‘‘another impact of OPM’s inadequate project planning 

is the potentially wasteful spending that has occurred in creating 

a ‘Shell’ environment before it was clear that it was the best solution, and before the technical analysis of the scope of the effort was 

completed.’’ The Committee expects OPM to keep it informed on 
100 

the status of future contracts executed to carry out the project and 

encourages OPM to perform the necessary project planning practices required by the Office of Management and Budget that were 

recommended by OPM’s IG. 

Retirement Processing.—The Committee acknowledges OPM’s actions to address the backlog of retirement claims and supports continued efforts to eliminate the backlog. OPM is directed to continue 

to inform the Committee of its progress. 

Retirement Modernization.—The Committee directs OPM to continue providing reports and status update briefings on modernization efforts and the strategic technology plan, as developments and 

milestones occur, and future plans are determined. 

Federal Security Clearances.—The Committee notes that in light 

of misconduct involving Federal contractor personnel under OPM’s 

Federal Investigative Services, there has been increased scrutiny 

into the process of conducting quality reviews for security clearance 

background investigations. The Committee recognizes the inherent 

conflict of interest when Federal security clearance contractors are 

contractually permitted to conduct quality reviews of their own 

work and urges the OPM Director to prevent future occurrences 

through stricter contractual control mechanisms. The Committee 

notes that preventing such inherent conflicts of interest with Federal contractors conducting security clearances significantly mitigates risk, a critical element to good governance and U.S. national 

security. Therefore, the Committee includes a provision in title VI 

preventing such contractors from conducting quality reviews of 

their own work. To ensure that contractor work is conducted properly, OPM should ensure that internal controls are implemented to 

prevent investigations from being closed prematurely. 

LIMITATION

(TRANSFER OF TRUST FUNDS)

Limitation, 2016 ..................................................................................... $124,550,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 144,653,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 124,550,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

These funds will be transferred from the appropriate trust funds 

of the Office of Personnel Management to cover administrative expenses for the retirement and insurance programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $124,550,000 for administrative expenses. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF TRUST FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $4,365,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 5,072,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,072,000 
101 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Inspector General is charged with establishing policies for conducting and coordinating efforts which promote economy, efficiency, and integrity in the Office of Personnel Management’s activities which prevent and detect fraud, waste, and mismanagement in the agency’s programs. Contract audits provide 

professional advice to agency contracting officials on accounting 

and financial matters regarding the negotiation, award, administration, repricing, and settlement of contracts. Internal agency audits review and evaluate all facets of agency operations, including 

financial statements. Evaluation and inspection services provide 

detailed technical evaluations of agency operations. Insurance audits review the operations of health and life insurance carriers, 

healthcare providers, and insurance subscribers. The investigative 

function provides for the detection and investigation of improper 

and illegal activities involving programs, personnel, and operations. 

Administrative sanctions debar from participation in the health insurance program those healthcare providers whose conduct may 

pose a threat to the financial integrity of the program itself or to 

the well-being of insurance program enrollees. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,072,000 for 

salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General in fiscal 

year 2017. 

The Committee appreciates the audit work the Inspector General 

has conducted on OPM’s IT security programs and practices and 

supports the Inspector General’s recommendations to improve 

OPM’s technical security controls. The Committee remains concerned about OPM’s security posture as it overhauls its technology 

infrastructure. The Committee encourages the Inspector General to 

continue monitoring OPM’s infrastructure improvement process. 

The Committee is also concerned about the ability of contractors to 

effectively provide assistance to millions of Americans that were affected by the data breach in addition to security controls with its 

existing vendors. The Committee encourages the Inspector General 

to continue to conduct oversight on OPM’s contracting and procurement practices. 

Semiannual Report to Congress.—The Committee encourages the 

Inspector General to regularly report in its Semiannual Report to 

Congress OPM’s efforts to improve and address cybersecurity challenges including steps taken to prevent, mitigate, and respond to 

data breaches involving sensitive personnel records and information; OPM’s cybersecurity policies and procedures in place, including policies and procedures relating to IT best practices such as 

data encryption, multifactor authentication, and continuous monitoring; OPM’s oversight of contractors providing IT services; and 

OPM’s compliance with government-wide initiatives to improve 

cybersecurity. 
102 

(LIMITATION ON TRANSFER FROM TRUST FUNDS)

Limitation, 2016 ..................................................................................... $22,479,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 26,662,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 25,112,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation on transfers from the 

trust funds in support of the Office of Inspector General [OIG] activities totaling $25,112,000 for fiscal year 2017. 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 1 ........................................................................... $24,119,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 26,535,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 24,119,000 

1Does not reflect use of prior year balances as permitted under Public Law 113–76, div. E. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel [OSC] provides a safe channel 

for Federal employees to report waste, fraud, abuse, and threats to 

public health and safety. 

The OSC was first established on January 1, 1979. From 1979 

until 1989, it operated as an autonomous investigative and prosecutorial arm of the Merit Systems Protection Board [MSPB]. In 

1989, Congress enacted the Whistleblower Protection Act (Public 

Law 101–12), which made OSC an independent agency within the 

executive branch. In 1994, the Uniformed Services Employment 

and Reemployment Rights Act [USERRA] (Public Law 103–353) became law. It defined employment-related rights of persons in connection with military service, prohibited discrimination against 

them because of that service, and gave OSC new authority to pursue remedies for violations by Federal agencies. 

Enactment of the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act 

(Public Law 112–199) in November 2012 significantly expanded the 

jurisdiction of the OSC and the types of cases the OSC is required 

by law to investigate. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,119,000 for 

OSC. 

IT Security.—The Committee remains concerned about information technology security at OSC. This is of particular concern given 

the confidential nature of the agency’s work and their ongoing investigations. The Committee notes that OSC has received a 34 percent budget increase over the past 3 years, yet the agency has not 

adequately invested in IT equipment, services, and staffing. Additionally, OSC has failed to develop policies and procedures consistent with FISMA requirements, OMB policy, and NIST guidelines. The Committee expects OSC to prioritize information security and directs the agency to report to the Committee within 90 

days of enactment on its plan to increase the security and resil-
103 

iency of the agency’s systems and ensure compliance with Federal 

guidelines. 

Veterans Affairs.—Approximately 37 percent of all OSC cases in 

2015 were from Department of Veterans Affairs [VA] employees, up 

from approximately 20 percent of cases in 2009, 2010, and 2011. 

Although OSC continues to obtain relief for VA whistleblowers, the 

Committee is concerned with the significant increase of VA whistleblower cases in the last few years. Therefore, the Committee believes that OSC should apply its budget proportionally with the 

percentage of cases that it receives from the VA. 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $15,200,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 17,726,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 15,200,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Postal Regulatory Commission [PRC] is an independent 

agency that has exercised regulatory oversight over the United 

States Postal Service since its creation by the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970. For over 3 decades, that oversight consisted primarily of conducting public, on-the-record hearings concerning proposed rates, mail classification, and major service changes, and recommended decisions for action to the Postal Service Board of Governors. The mission of the PRC is to ensure transparency and accountability of the United States Postal Service and foster a vital 

and efficient universal mail system. 

The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (Public Law 

109–435) assigned significant responsibilities to the PRC. These enhanced authorities include providing regulatory oversight of the 

pricing of Postal Service products and services, ensuring Postal 

Service transparency and accountability, consulting on delivery 

service standards and performance measures, consulting on international postal policies, preventing cross-subsidization or other 

anticompetitive postal practices, and serving as a forum to act on 

complaints with postal products and services. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation, out of the Postal 

Fund, of $15,200,000 for the Postal Regulatory Commission. 

The Committee urges the PRC, which is funded from the Postal 

Service Fund and derived directly from postal rates and fees paid 

by postal customers, to optimize efficient use of its resources, including exercising prudent decision-making. 

PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES OVERSIGHT BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $21,297,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 10,081,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 10,081,000 
104 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board [PCLOB] is an 

independent agency within the executive branch established by the 

Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 

2007 (Public Law 110–53). The Board is the successor to the Board 

created within the Executive Office of the President under the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Public 

Law 108–458) as recommended in the July 22, 2004 report of the 

National Commission on Terrorist Acts Upon the United States 

(the 9/11 Commission). 

The Board’s purpose is to review and analyze actions the executive branch takes to protect the Nation from terrorism, ensuring 

the need for such actions is balanced with the need to protect privacy and civil liberties; and to ensure that liberty concerns are appropriately considered in the development and implementation of 

laws, regulations, and policies related to efforts to protect the Nation against terrorism. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,081,000 for 

the PCLOB. This amount is equal to the budget request and 

$11,216,000 below the enacted level due to one-time costs in fiscal 

year 2016 required to support the Board’s physical move. 

The Committee believes it is important to ensure that funds are 

used efficiently during the required move. The Committee directs 

the Board to continue to work with the General Services Administration to minimize relocation costs and to report regularly to the 

Committee regarding relocation efforts. 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $1,605,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 1,781,457,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,605,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] is an independent agency responsible for administering many of the Nation’s 

laws regulating the areas of securities and finance. 

The mission of the SEC is to administer and enforce Federal securities laws in order to protect investors, maintain fair, honest, 

and efficient markets, and promote capital formation. This includes 

ensuring full disclosure of appropriate financial information, regulating the Nation’s securities markets, and preventing and policing 

fraud and malpractice in the securities and financial markets. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total budget (obligational) authority of $1,605,000,000 for the salaries and expenses of the SEC, to 

be fully derived from fee collections. 
105 

Fee Offset Nature of Account.—Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, 

transaction fees receipts are treated as offsetting collections equal 

to the amount of the appropriation. 

Reserve Fund Notifications.—The Committee appreciates the 

SEC’s adherence to its obligation to notify Congress of the date, 

amount, and purpose of any obligation from the Fund within 10 

days of such obligation. The Committee directs the SEC, in its written notifications to Congress required by 15 U.S.C. 78d(i)(3) regarding amounts obligated from the SEC Reserve Fund, to specify: (1) 

the balance in the fund remaining available after the obligation is 

deducted; (2) the estimated total cost of the project for which 

amounts are being deducted; (3) the total amount for all projects 

that have withdrawn funding from the Reserve Fund since fiscal 

year 2012; and (4) the estimated amount, per project, that will be 

required to complete all ongoing projects which use funding derived 

from the Reserve Fund. 

Spending Plan.—The Committee directs the SEC to submit, 

within 30 days of enactment, a detailed spending plan for the allocation of appropriated funds displayed by discrete program, project, 

and activity, including staffing projections, specifying both FTEs 

and contractors, and planned investments in information technology. The Committee also directs the SEC to submit, within 30 

days of enactment, a detailed spending plan for the allocation of expenditures from the Reserve Fund. 

Covered Clearing Agencies.—The Committee strongly urges the 

Securities and Exchange Commission to expeditiously finalize its 

Covered Clearing Agency rulemaking proposal to avoid punitive 

capital charges from being imposed for accessing the U.S. listed options market through European Union bank affiliates. The proposal 

would subject systemically important clearinghouses for which the 

SEC is the supervisory agency to heightened standards that have 

been agreed upon by U.S. and international banking and securities 

regulators. The Committee is aware that these standards, the Principles for Financial Markets Infrastructures, were issued in April 

2012 to ensure that clearinghouses are resilient in light of the critical role they play in the financial markets and have already been 

adopted by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for systemically 

important clearinghouses for which they are the supervisory agencies. The Committee notes adoption of the proposal may help facilitate the process by which the European Commission would find the 

SEC’s regulatory regime for clearinghouses to be equivalent to the 

regulatory regime for clearinghouses in Europe, a recognition critical to the continued competitiveness of U.S. options exchanges 

internationally and the continued ability of persons outside of the 

U.S. to effectively access the vibrant and very liquid U.S. listed options market. 

SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $22,703,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 22,900,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 22,900,000 
106 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Selective Service System is an independent Federal agency, 

operating with permanent authorization under the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 451 et seq.). The agency is not part 

of the Department of Defense, but its basic mission is to be prepared to supply manpower to the Armed Forces adequate to ensure 

the security of the United States during a time of national emergency. Since 1973, the Armed Forces have relied on volunteers to 

fill military manpower requirements. However, the Selective Service System remains the primary vehicle by which personnel will be 

brought into the military if Congress and the President should authorize a return to the draft. 

In December 1987, Selective Service was tasked by law (Public 

Law 100–180) to develop plans for a postmobilization healthcare 

personnel delivery system capable of providing the necessary critically skilled healthcare personnel to the Armed Forces in time of 

emergency. An automated system capable of handling mass registration and inductions is now complete, together with necessary 

draft legislation, a draft Presidential proclamation, prototype forms 

and letters, and other products. These products will be available 

should the need arise. The development of supplemental standby 

products, such as a compliance system for healthcare personnel, 

continues using very limited existing resources. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $22,900,000 for 

the Selective Service System. 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $871,042,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 877,894,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 871,161,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Small Business Administration [SBA] provides American entrepreneurs access to capital, Federal contracting opportunities, 

and entrepreneurial education in order to grow businesses and create jobs. SBA also provides disaster assistance for businesses of all 

sizes, non-profit organizations, homeowners, and renters. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $871,161,000 for the 

Small Business Administration [SBA]. The recommendation is 

$119,000 above the fiscal year 2016 enacted level, and the amount 

provided will support the same level or higher of lending. The recommendation includes $158,829,000 for the Disaster Loans Program Account designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant 

to the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, 

as amended. Funding is distributed among the SBA appropriation 

accounts as described below. 
107 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $268,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 275,033,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 268,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Salaries and Expenses appropriation provides for the overall 

operating expenses of the SBA, including compensation and benefits for staff located at headquarters, regional, and district offices, 

rent and other agency-wide costs, and operating costs for program 

offices, including the Office of Capital Access, Office of Credit Risk 

Management, Office of Entrepreneurial Development, Office of Investments and Innovation, Office of Government Contracting and 

Business Development, Office of International Trade, Office of 

Management and Administration, and for other program and supporting offices. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $268,000,000 for salaries and expenses of the SBA. 

The Committee recommends at least $12,000,000 for SBA’s Office 

of Credit Risk Management [OCRM] for lender oversight and riskbased reviews. Funding for the Office of General Counsel has been 

provided separately from this total. In support of its mission to 

analyze and manage the risk of SBA’s loan portfolio, OCRM performs performance analytics to identify and understand lender performance trends and assess the quality of the overall loan portfolio. 

The Committee finds that OCRM must play a key role in eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse in SBA lending programs and protecting taxpayer losses on loans by ensuring lenders comply with 

procedures that mitigate the risk of loss under SBA’s loan programs. 

The Committee is concerned about the quality of lender oversight 

activities at SBA, particularly considering the magnitude of SBA’s 

loan portfolio, and notes that SBA’s Office of Inspector General continues to identify weaknesses in SBA’s lender oversight process. 

The 7(a) loan program alone has grown over 50 percent in the past 

three fiscal years, and the Committee strongly believes SBA must 

conduct robust oversight and enforcement efforts to ensure the integrity of all lending programs. SBA loan programs rely on numerous outside parties (e.g., private lenders, local economic development organizations, nonprofit community lenders, and venture capital investors) to complete loan transactions, and many of SBA’s 

loans are made by lenders to whom SBA has delegated loan-making authority. SBA’s Office of Inspector General has reported that 

although SBA has made some improvements, its controls were not 

adequate to monitor loan agent involvement and mitigate the risk 

of loss and fraud in the 7(a) loan program. The Committee agrees 

with SBA’s Inspector General recommendations and supports efforts to strengthen OCRM’s ability to conduct strong oversight of 

SBA loan portfolios and the lenders that participate in order to reinforce general program soundness and manage overall risk. 
108 

Finally, the Committee finds that the Loan and Lender Monitoring System [L/LMS] is a vital component of the SBA’s technical 

capability to provide oversight of its largest lending programs, the 

7(a) and 504 loan programs. OCRM uses L/LMS as a tool for managing the risk in the loan and lender portfolios of more than 4,500 

lenders, who have approximately 320,000 active loans valued at 

more than $100,000,000,000 in current dollars. The Committee is 

disappointed that SBA allowed this important oversight tool to 

lapse briefly in February and March 2016. SBA is directed to continue its use of the Loan and Lender Monitoring System [L/LMS] 

to ensure that lenders are employing sound financial risk management techniques to manage and monitor risk within their SBA loan 

portfolios. SBA is directed to continue to maintain the current capability and capacity of the L/LMS system, and to strongly consider 

ways to upgrade the system to improve lender oversight. 

The Committee recognizes that the three current exceptions for 

the North American Industry Classification System [NAICS] Code 

541712 are vastly similar. Therefore, the SBA should look at the 

impact of consolidating the current exceptions into one with an employee cap of 1,500 and consider revising the methodology for determining employee size for NAICS Codes to use a 36-month rolling average computation. 

SBIC Program Licensing.—The Committee continues to be concerned with the slow pace of licensing at the Small Business Investment Company [SBIC] program. SBA has a 6-month goal to approve licenses that are in the application process, yet the time for 

license approval is often more than 1 year. Delays are occurring in 

contradiction to the fact that the number of applications has decreased. The Committee continues to recommend that the SBA create a meaningfully expedited and streamlined licensing process for 

repeat licensees with the same management teams and proven 

track record in the SBIC Program. This fast track process for repeat licensees should be completed within 45 days after an application is submitted to the SBA, which will allow SBA to properly 

focus their resources on first time funds. 

SBIC Program and State Data.—For decades an important set of 

consolidated SBIC Program data has routinely been shared with 

the industry, Congress, and the public on a monthly basis. This important information was made available on a monthly basis as a 

meaningful economic indicator on the small business sector and an 

indicator of SBA’s activities and performance. In addition to the 

SBIC Program data, the SBA routinely released annual data on the 

impact of SBIC investments as well as specific companies in all 50 

States. The SBA has only released the SBIC program data once 

since the end of the 2015 fiscal year, and the SBA has not released 

the State data since the 2013 fiscal year. The Committee recommends that SBA release this data to industry and Congress to 

allow for a thorough review of the impact of the SBIC Program on 

the economy and an analysis of the performance of the SBA. 

Federal and State Technology Partnership Program.—The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for the Federal and State Technology [FAST] Partnership Program in fiscal year 2017. The Committee supports the FAST program’s efforts to reach innovative, 

technology-driven small businesses and to leverage the Small Busi-
109 

ness Innovation Research [SBIR] and Small Business Technology 

Transfer [STTR] program to stimulate economic development. The 

FAST program is particularly important in States that are seeking 

to build high technology industries but are underrepresented in the 

SBIR/STTR programs. The Committee recognizes that Small Business and Technology Development Centers [SBTDCs] serve small 

businesses in these fields and are accredited to provide intellectual 

property and technology commercialization assistance to businesses 

in high technology industries. Of the amount provided, $1,000,000 

shall be for FAST awards to SBTDCs fully accredited for technology designation as of December 31, 2016. 

8(a) Business Development Program.—The Committee supports 

the work of the 8(a) Business Development Program. However, the 

Committee is concerned that not enough is done to ensure participants are eligible and that the program is not being abused. The 

Small Business Administration is directed to report to Congress 

within 90 days of enactment on efforts made to protect the integrity of the program. Further, the Committee directs the Small 

Business Administration to limit a former participant or principal 

of a former participant to an equity ownership interest of no more 

than 20 percent of a current participant in the development stage 

of the program and no more than 30 percent of a participant in the 

transitional stage of the program if the participant is in the same 

or similar line of business as the former participant or principal of 

the former participant. 

ENTREPRENEURIAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $231,100,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 230,600,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 231,100,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

SBA’s Entrepreneurial Development Programs support non-credit 

business assistance to entrepreneurs. The appropriation includes 

funding for a vast network of resource partners located throughout 

the Nation, including Small Business Development Centers, Women’s Business Centers, SCORE (previously Service Corps of Retired 

Executives) chapters, and Veterans Business Outreach centers. 

This resource network and several other SBA programs provide 

training, counseling, and technical assistance to entrepreneurs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $231,100,000 for the 

SBA Entrepreneurial Development Programs. 

The Committee recommendations, by program, are displayed in 

the following table: 

ENTREPRENEURIAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Committee 

recommendation 

7(j) Technical Assistance ..................................................................................................................................... 2,800 

Entrepreneurship Education ................................................................................................................................. 10,000 

Growth Accelerators ............................................................................................................................................. 1,000 
110 

ENTREPRENEURIAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Committee 

recommendation 

HUBZone Program ................................................................................................................................................ 3,000 

Microloan Technical Assistance ........................................................................................................................... 25,000 

National Women’s Business Council ................................................................................................................... 1,500 

Native American Outreach ................................................................................................................................... 2,000 

Regional Innovation Clusters ............................................................................................................................... 6,000 

SCORE .................................................................................................................................................................. 10,500 

Small Business Development Centers (SBDCs) ................................................................................................... 120,000 

State Trade Expansion Promotion (STEP) ............................................................................................................ 20,000 

Veterans Outreach ................................................................................................................................................ 12,300 

Women’s Business Centers (WBC) ....................................................................................................................... 17,000 

Total, Entrepreneurial Development Programs ....................................................................................... 231,100 

The Committee directs that the amounts provided for SBA’s Entrepreneurial Development Programs, as specified in the table 

above, shall be administered in the same manner as previous years 

and shall not be reduced, reallocated, or reprogrammed to provide 

additional funds for other programs, initiatives, or activities. 

Small Business Development Centers.—The Committee continues 

to support the Small Business Development Center [SBDC] Program and recommends $120,000,000 for fiscal year 2017. SBDCs 

play an integral role in the SBA resource partner network that 

supports 1,200,000 small business owners and aspiring entrepreneurs each year. Through more than 900 service centers, 

SBDCs provide management and technical assistance in key areas 

to small business clients throughout the Nation. As the economy 

struggles, SBDCs have reported a significant increase in demand 

for their expertise as businesses seek guidance on how to weather 

the economic conditions and as newly unemployed Americans look 

for advice on starting a small business as a new career path. Providing support for SBDCs is more critical than ever as our economy 

works to recover and grow. The Committee directs SBA to 

prioritize the continuation of a robust SBDC network and to partner with the network and SBA’s other resource partners in the implementation of all of SBA’s lending, entrepreneurial development, 

and procurement programs. 

The Committee directs that, subject to the availability of funds, 

the Administrator of the SBA shall, to the extent practicable, ensure that a small business development center is appropriately reimbursed within the same fiscal year in which the expenses are 

submitted for reimbursement for any and all legitimate expenses 

incurred in carrying out activities under section 21(a)(1) et seq. of 

the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 648(a)(1) et seq.). 

Veterans Programs.—The Committee supports funding for veterans programs and provides $12,300,000 for veterans outreach, 

which includes funding for Veterans Business Outreach Centers 

[VBOC], Boots to Business, Veteran-Women Igniting the Spirit of 

Entrepreneurship [V–WISE], Entrepreneurship Bootcamp for Veterans with Disabilities [EBV], and Boots to Business Reboot. The 

recommendation is equal to the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and 

equal to the budget request. 
111 

Native American Outreach.—SBA’s Office of Native American Affairs works to ensure that American Indians, Alaska Natives, and 

Native Hawaiians seeking to create, develop, and expand small 

businesses have full access to SBA’s entrepreneurial development, 

lending, and procurement programs. The Committee recommends 

$2,000,000 for SBA’s Native American outreach programs. The recommendation is equal to the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and 

equal to the budget request. 

HUBZone.—The Historically Underutilized Business Zones 

[HUBZone] program helps small businesses in urban and rural 

communities gain preferential access to Federal procurement opportunities. The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for the 

HUBZone program. This program is a critical resource for distressed communities, especially those surrounding military bases 

closed under the Base Realignment and Closure [BRAC] process. 

The Committee is aware that businesses located in a BRAC 

HUBZone face unique challenges in qualifying for the program and 

competing for Federal procurement opportunities, and directs the 

SBA to examine ways to address these issues in any future revisions of the Small Business Act or other legislation. 

Regional Innovation Clusters.—The Committee recommends 

$6,000,000 for SBA’s regional innovation clusters. The Committee 

encourages SBA to support nonprofit organizations that provide 

business development services designed to accelerate industry sectors built on regional assets under the initiative. The Committee 

encourages SBA to support initiatives that promote a culture of innovative entrepreneurship and provide services and support directly to early-stage and high-tech innovation opportunities. 

State Trade and Expansion Promotion [STEP].—The Committee 

recommends $20,000,000 for STEP for fiscal year 2017. STEP provides grants to states to supplement their export promotion programs with the goal of increasing the number of small businesses 

that are exporting and raising the value of exports for small businesses that are already exporting. States provide matching funds 

for STEP grants and have used funds to support trade missions, 

international marketing efforts, export counseling, and export trade 

show exhibits. 

The Committee recognizes the impact of the SBA State Trade 

and Expansion Promotion [STEP] program in supporting the development of State Export Partnerships. To extend this impact, promote collaboration, and eliminate duplication of services, the Committee encourages STEP State providers to coordinate activities 

and deliverables with Small Business Development Centers 

[SBDCs]. 

Entrepreneurial Education.—The Committee recommends 

$10,000,000 for the entrepreneurial education program. This 

amount is equal to the fiscal year 2016 enacted level and equal to 

the budget request. The recommendation will allow SBA to support 

its entrepreneurial education initiative to provide intensive training to small business owners with existing small businesses that 

have completed the ‘‘start up’’ phase and are facing common, solvable challenges to sustain and grow their businesses. 
112 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $19,900,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 19,900,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 19,900,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The SBA Office of Inspector General conducts audits to identify 

wasteful expenditures and program mismanagement, investigates 

fraud and other wrongdoing, and takes other actions to deter and 

detect waste, fraud, abuse, and inefficiencies in SBA programs and 

operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $19,900,000 for the Office of Inspector General. 

The Committee directs the Inspector General to continue routine 

analysis and reporting on SBA’s modernization of its loan management and accounting systems, including acquisition, contractor 

oversight, implementation, and progress regarding budget and 

schedule. 

OFFICE OF ADVOCACY

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $9,120,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 9,320,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 9,120,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Advocacy, an independent office within SBA, solicits 

and represents the views, concerns, and interests of small businesses before Congress, the White House, Federal agencies, Federal 

courts, and State policymakers. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $9,120,000 for the Office of Advocacy. The recommendation is equal to the fiscal year 

2016 enacted level. 

BUSINESS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $156,064,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 157,064,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 157,064,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

SBA administers a variety of loan programs to expand entrepreneurs’ access to capital to start and grow small businesses. The 

7(a) loan program is the Federal Government’s primary business 

loan program to assist small businesses in obtaining financing 

when they do not qualify for traditional credit. Under 7(a), SBA 

guarantees a portion (typically 75 to 90 percent) of loans made by 

private lenders. Under the 504 program, SBA supports loans to 

small businesses for financing major fixed assets such as real estate and major equipment. The 504 program combines SBA guar-
113 

anteed loans made by nonprofit Certified Development Companies 

[CDCs] with loans from private lenders to provide financing for 

small businesses. 

Under the Small Business Investment Company [SBIC] program, 

SBA partners with professionally managed investment funds, 

called SBICs. The SBICs combine their own capital with funds borrowed with an SBA guarantee to make investments in small businesses. 

Finally, under the Microloan program, SBA provides funds to 

specialized nonprofit, community-based intermediary lenders which 

provide small loans for working capital, inventory, and other operating expenses. The maximum microloan is $50,000 and the average loan made under the program is $12,246. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $157,064,000 for the 

Business Loans Program Account for fiscal year 2017. The recommendation is equal to the budget request and will support the 

same level or higher of lending. 

The recommendation provides $152,726,000 for administrative 

expenses, which may be transferred to and merged with SBA salaries and expenses to cover the common overhead expenses associated with the business loans programs. The recommendation provides $4,338,000 for the Microloan direct 

loan program to support lending volume estimated at $44,000,000. 

An additional amount of $25,000,000 is recommended under the 

heading ‘‘Entrepreneurial Development Programs’’ for technical assistance grants to Microlending intermediaries. 

Business loan programs provide crucial access to capital for new 

and expanding small businesses, but the approval process can be 

challenging and overly burdensome. The SBA should solicit input 

from loan recipients seeking ways to streamline the loan review 

and approval process for small businesses. The Committee directs 

the SBA to report to the Committees on Appropriations and Small 

Business and Entrepreneurship within 180 days on the results of 

this solicitation, including legislative changes, requests for additional resources, or other areas that SBA may pursue in order to 

make the loan application and approval process more efficient for 

applicants. 

DISASTER LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $186,858,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 185,977,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 185,977,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

SBA provides low-interest, long-term loans to businesses of all 

sizes, homeowners, renters, and nonprofit organizations affected by 

disasters. SBA disaster loans are the primary form of Federal assistance for the repair and rebuilding of non-farm, private sector 

disaster losses. SBA makes two types of disaster loans. Physical 

disaster loans are for permanent rebuilding and replacement of un-
114 

insured or underinsured disaster-damaged privately owned real 

and/or personal property and are available to businesses of all 

sizes, nonprofit organizations, homeowners, and renters. Economic 

Injury Disaster Loans provide necessary working capital for small 

businesses and nonprofit organizations until normal operations resume after a disaster. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $185,977,000 for the administrative 

costs of the Disaster Loans program. This amount is equal to the 

budget request. Of the total recommendation, $158,829,000 is designated by Congress as disaster relief pursuant to the Balanced 

Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

(INCLUDING RESCISSION AND TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Section 520 continues a provision concerning transfer authority 

and availability of funds. 

Section 521 permanently rescinds unobligated balances in the amount of $55,000,000 made available for the Certified Development Company Program under section 503 of the Small Business 

Investment Act of 1958. 

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE

PAYMENT TO THE POSTAL SERVICE FUND

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $55,075,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 63,658,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 48,422,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Postal Service does not depend upon taxpayer 

subsidies through discretionary appropriations for its operations 

but generates nearly all of its more than $65,000,000,000 in annual 

gross operating revenue by charging users of the mail for the costs 

of postage, products, and services. Funds provided to the Postal 

Service in the Payment to the Postal Service Fund include appropriations for revenue forgone including providing free mail for the 

blind, and for overseas absentee voting. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends appropriations totaling $48,422,000 

for payment to the Postal Service Fund to compensate for revenue 

forgone on free mail for the blind and for overseas voters. 

The Committee includes provisions in the bill to ensure that mail 

for overseas voting and mail for the blind shall continue to be free; 

that 6-day delivery and rural delivery of mail shall continue without reduction; and that none of the funds provided be used to consolidate or close small rural and other small post offices in fiscal 

year 2017. 

On May 27, 2015, the Postal Service announced its decision to 

defer most of the mail processing plant consolidations scheduled to 

take place as the final stage of its Network Rationalization Initia-
115 

tive. The Postal Service is encouraged to update the Area Mail 

Processing feasibility studies for these plants using the most recent 

available data in advance of implementing the proposed consolidations. 

The Committee is concerned that the Postal Service and Postal 

Regulatory Commission have not completed the methodology on 

rural and urban mail delivery despite directives pursuant to enactment of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Public Law 

114–113). The rural mail delivery report is expected to show service scores for mail from rural to rural areas, rural to urban areas 

and urban to rural areas, with timeliness scores broken down by 

State. This report is necessary to demonstrate whether major 

changes in the Postal Service mail processing network have had a 

deleterious effect upon rural mail service. The Committee directs 

that progress on completion and subsequent implementation of this 

methodology be prioritized at both the Postal Service and Postal 

Regulatory Commission in order to address mail delays identified 

by this effort. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $248,600,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 258,800,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 252,600,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General 

[OIG] is an independent organization established in 1996 and 

charged with reporting to Congress on the overall efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of Postal Service programs and operations. 

The OIG plays a key role in maintaining the integrity and accountability of America’s postal service, its revenue and assets, and its 

employees. The OIG meets this responsibility by conducting and 

supervising objective and independent audits, investigations, and 

other reviews. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation, out of the Postal Fund, of $252,600,000 for the United States Postal Service Office 

of Inspector General. 

UNITED STATES TAX COURT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2016 ............................................................................. $51,300,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ........................................................................... 53,861,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 53,861,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The U.S. Tax Court is an independent judicial body in the legislative branch established in 1969 under Article I of the Constitution of the United States. The Court was created to provide a na-
116 

tional forum for the resolution of disputes between taxpayers and 

the Internal Revenue Service, to resolve cases expeditiously while 

giving careful consideration to the merits of each matter, and to ensure the uniform interpretation of the Internal Revenue Code. 

The Tax Court is one of three courts in which taxpayers can 

bring suit to contest IRS liability determinations, and the only one 

in which taxpayers can do so without prepaying any portion of the 

disputed taxes. The matters over which the Court has jurisdiction 

are set forth in various sections of title 26 of the United States 

Code. 

The Court is composed of 19 judges, one of whom the judges elect 

as chief judge. Tax Court judges are appointed to 15-year terms by 

the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. In their 

judicial duties the judges are assisted by senior judges, who participate in the adjudication of regular cases, and by special trial 

judges, who hear small tax cases and certain regular cases assigned to them by the chief judge. 

The Court is headquartered in Washington, DC, and conducts 

trial sessions in 74 cities throughout the United States, including 

Hawaii and Alaska. Decisions by the Court are reviewable by the 

U.S. Courts of Appeals and, if certiorari is granted, by the Supreme 

Court. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $53,861,000 for 

the U.S. Tax Court. 

STATEMENT CONCERNING GENERAL PROVISIONS 

The Financial Services and General Government appropriations 

bill includes general provisions which govern both the activities of 

the agencies covered by the bill, and, in some cases, activities of 

agencies, programs, and general government activities that are not 

specifically covered by the bill. 

The bill contains a number of general provisions that have been 

carried in this bill for many years and which are routine in nature 

and scope. General provisions in the bill are explained under this 

section of the report. Those general provisions that deal with a single agency only are shown as administrative provisions immediately following that particular agency’s or department’s appropriation accounts in the bill. Those provisions that address activities or directives affecting all of the agencies covered in this bill are 

contained in title VI. General provisions that are Governmentwide 

in scope are specified in title VII of this bill. General provisions applicable to the District of Columbia are set forth in title VIII of this 

bill. 
(117) 

TITLE VI 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—THIS ACT 

Section 601 continues the provision prohibiting pay and other expenses of non-Federal parties intervening in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this act. 

Section 602 continues the provision prohibiting obligations beyond the current fiscal year and prohibits transfers of funds unless 

expressly provided. 

Section 603 continues the provision limiting expenditures for any 

consulting service through procurement contracts where such expenditures are a matter of public record and available for public inspection. 

Section 604 continues the provision prohibiting funds in this act 

from being transferred without express authority. 

Section 605 continues the provision prohibiting the use of funds 

to engage in activities that would prohibit the enforcement of section 307 of the 1930 Tariff Act (46 Stat. 590). 

Section 606 continues the provision prohibiting the use of funds 

unless the recipient agrees to comply with the Buy American Act. 

Section 607 continues the provision prohibiting funding for any 

person or entity convicted of violating the Buy American Act. 

Section 608 continues the provision authorizing the reprogramming of funds and specifies the reprogramming procedures for 

agencies funded by this act. 

Section 609 continues the provision ensuring that 50 percent of 

unobligated balances may remain available for certain purposes. 

Section 610 continues the provision restricting the use of funds 

for the Executive Office of the President to request official background reports from the Federal Bureau of Investigation without 

the written consent of the individual who is the subject of the report. 

Section 611 continues the provision ensuring that the cost accounting standards shall not apply with respect to a contract under 

the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. 

Section 612 continues the provision allowing use of certain funds 

relating to nonforeign area cost of living allowances. 

Section 613 continues the provision prohibiting the expenditure 

of funds for abortions under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. 

Section 614 continues the provision providing an exemption from 

section 613 if the life of the mother is in danger or the pregnancy 

is a result of an act of rape or incest. 

Section 615 continues the provision waiving restrictions on the 

purchase of nondomestic articles, materials, and supplies in the 

case of acquisition by the Federal Government of information technology. 
118 

Section 616 continues a provision on the acceptance by agencies 

or commissions funded by this act, or by their officers or employees, 

of payment or reimbursement for travel, subsistence, or related expenses from any person or entity (or their representative) that engages in activities regulated by such agencies or commissions. 

Section 617 continues a provision permitting the Securities and 

Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to fund a joint advisory committee to advise on emerging 

regulatory issues, notwithstanding section 708 of this act. 

Section 618 continues the provision requiring agencies covered by 

this act with independent leasing authority to consult with the 

General Services Administration before seeking new office space or 

making alterations to existing office space. 

Section 619 provides for several appropriated mandatory accounts, where authorizing language requires the payment of funds 

for Compensation of the President, the Judicial Retirement Funds 

(Judicial Officers’ Retirement Fund, Judicial Survivors’ Annuities 

Fund, and the United States Court of Federal Claims Judges’ Retirement Fund), the Government Payment for Annuitants for Employee Health Benefits and Employee Life Insurance, and the Payment to the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund. In addition, language is included for certain retirement, healthcare and 

survivor benefits required by 3 U.S.C. 102 note. 

Section 620 continues a provision allowing the Public Company 

Accounting Oversight Board to obligate amounts collected from 

monetary penalties for the purpose of funding scholarships for accounting students, as authorized by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 

(Public Law 107–204). 

Section 621 continues the provision prohibiting funds for the 

Federal Trade Commission to complete the draft report on food 

marketed to children unless certain requirements are met. 

Section 622 continues the provision prohibiting funds for certain 

positions. 

Section 623 continues a provision addressing conflicts of interest 

by preventing contractor security clearance-related background investigators from undertaking final Federal reviews of their own 

work. 

Section 624 continues the provision providing authority for Chief 

Information Officers over information technology spending. 

Section 625 continues the provision prohibiting funds from being 

used in contravention of the Federal Records Act. 

Section 626 continues the provision related to electronic communications. 

Section 627 continues the provision relating to Universal Service 

Fund payments for wireless providers. 

Section 628 continues the provision relating to the Securities and 

Exchange Commission. 

Section 629 continues, with modification, the provision relating 

to individuals affected by the data breach of systems of OPM. 

Section 630 is a new provision related to inspectors general. 

Section 631 is a new provision related to joint sales agreements. 

Section 632 is a new provision relating to the Securities and Exchange Commission. 
119 

Section 633 is a new provision relating to the Federal Communications Commission. 

Section 634 is a new provision relating to financing of sales of 

agriculture commodities and vessels entering a port or place in 

Cuba. 

Section 635 is a new provision relating to travel to Cuba. 

Section 636 is a new provision relating to the access to telecommunications devices and services in Cuba. 

Section 637 is a new provision relating airline transit stops to 

and from Cuba. 

Section 638 is a new provision relating to financial institutions 

that provide financial services to certain entities engaged in commercial activities related to marijuana. 
(120) 

TITLE VII 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—GOVERNMENTWIDE 

DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES, AND CORPORATIONS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Section 701 continues the provision requiring agencies to administer a policy designed to ensure that all of its workplaces are free 

from the illegal use of controlled substances. 

Section 702 continues the provision setting specific limits on the 

cost of passenger vehicles purchased by the Federal Government 

with exceptions for police, heavy duty, electric hybrid, and clean 

fuels vehicles with an exception for commercial vehicles that operate on emerging motor vehicle technology. 

Section 703 continues the provision allowing funds made available to agencies for travel to also be used for quarters allowances 

and cost-of-living allowances. 

Section 704 continues the provision prohibiting the Government, 

with certain specified exceptions, from employing non-U.S. citizens 

whose posts of duty would be in the continental United States. 

Section 705 continues the provision ensuring that agencies will 

have authority to pay the General Services Administration for 

space renovation and other services. 

Section 706 continues the provision allowing agencies to use receipts from the sale of materials for acquisition, waste reduction 

and prevention, environmental management programs, and other 

Federal employee programs. 

Section 707 continues the provision providing that funds for administrative expenses may be used to pay rent and other service 

costs in the District of Columbia. 

Section 708 continues the provision precluding interagency financing of groups absent prior statutory approval. 

Section 709 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds for enforcing regulations disapproved in accordance 

with the applicable law of the United States. 

Section 710 continues the provision limiting the amount that can 

be used for redecoration of offices under certain circumstances. 

Section 711 continues the provision that permits interagency 

funding of national security and emergency preparedness telecommunications initiatives, which benefit multiple Federal departments, agencies, and entities. 

Section 712 continues the provision requiring agencies to certify 

that a schedule C appointment was not created solely or primarily 

to detail the employee to the White House. 

Section 713 continues the provision prohibiting the use of funds 

to prevent Federal employees from communicating with Congress 
121 

or to take disciplinary or personnel actions against employees for 

such communication. 

Section 714 continues the provision prohibiting Federal training 

not directly related to the performance of official duties. 

Section 715 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda designed to support or 

defeat legislation pending before Congress. 

Section 716 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds by an agency to provide home addresses of Federal 

employees to labor organizations, absent employee authorization, or 

court order. 

Section 717 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds to provide nonpublic information such as mailing or 

telephone lists to any person or organization outside of the Government without approval of the Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 718 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda purposes within the 

United States not authorized by Congress. 

Section 719 continues the provision directing agencies’ employees 

to use official time in an honest effort to perform official duties. 

Section 720 continues the provision authorizing the use of current fiscal year funds to finance an appropriate share of the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board administrative costs. 

Section 721 continues a provision authorizing the transfer of 

funds to the General Services Administration to finance an appropriate share of various Governmentwide boards and councils under 

certain conditions. 

Section 722 continues the provision authorizing breastfeeding at 

any location in a Federal building or on Federal property. 

Section 723 continues the provision permitting interagency funding of the National Science and Technology Council, and requiring 

an OMB report on the budget and resources of the Council. 

Section 724 continues the provision requiring identification of the 

Federal agencies providing Federal funds and the amount provided 

for all proposals, solicitations, grant applications, forms, notifications, press releases, or other publications related to the distribution of funding to a State. 

Section 725 continues the provision prohibiting the use of funds 

to monitor personal information relating to the use of Federal 

Internet sites. 

Section 726 continues the provision regarding contraceptive coverage under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan. 

Section 727 continues the provision recognizing that the United 

States is committed to ensuring the health of the Olympic, Pan 

American and Paralympic athletes, and supports the strict adherence to antidoping in sport activities. 

Section 728 continues the provision allowing departments and 

agencies to use official travel funds to participate in the fractional 

aircraft ownership pilot programs. 

Section 729 continues the provision prohibiting funds for implementation of OPM regulations limiting detailees to the legislative 

branch and placing certain limitations on the Coast Guard Congressional Fellowship program. 
122 

Section 730 continues the provision prohibiting the expenditure 

of funds for the acquisition of certain additional Federal law enforcement training facilities. 

Section 731 continues a provision that prohibits executive branch 

agencies from creating or funding prepackaged news stories that 

are broadcast or distributed in the United States unless specific notification conditions are met. 

Section 732 continues a provision prohibiting funds used in contravention of the Privacy Act, section 552a of title 5, United States 

Code or section 522.224 of title 48 of the Code of Federal Regulations. 

Section 733 continues a provision prohibiting funds in this or any 

other act from being used for Federal contracts with inverted domestic corporations or other corporations using similar inverted 

structures, unless the contract preceded this act or the Secretary 

grants a waiver in the interest of national security. 

Section 734 continues a provision requiring agencies to remit to 

the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund an amount equal 

to the Office of Personnel Management’s average unit cost of processing a retirement claim for the preceding fiscal year to be available to the Office of Personnel Management for the cost of processing retirements of employees who separate under Voluntary 

Early Retirement Authority or who receive Voluntary Separation 

Incentive Payments. 

Section 735 continues a provision prohibiting funds to require 

any entity submitting an offer for a Federal contract to disclose political contributions. 

Section 736 continues a provision prohibiting funds for the painting of a portrait of an employee of the Federal Government including the President, the Vice President, a Member of Congress, the 

head of an executive branch agency, of the head of an office of the 

legislative branch. 

Section 737 continues a provision limiting the pay increases of 

certain prevailing rate employees. 

Section 738 continues a provision eliminating automatic statutory pay increases for the Vice President, political appointees paid 

under the executive schedule, ambassadors who are not career 

members of the Foreign Service, politically appointed (noncareer) 

Senior Executive Service employees, and any other senior political 

appointee paid at or above level IV of the executive schedule. 

Section 739 continues a provision requiring reports to Inspectors 

General concerning expenditures for agency conferences. 

Section 740 continues a provision prohibiting the use of funds to 

increase, eliminate, or reduce a program or project unless such 

change is made pursuant to reprogramming or transfer provisions. 

Section 741 continues a provision prohibiting the Office of Personnel Management or any other agency from using funds to implement regulations changing the competitive areas under reductionsin-force for Federal employees. 

Section 742 continues a provision that prohibits the use of funds 

to begin or announce a study or a public-private competition regarding the conversion to contractor performance of any function 

performed by civilian Federal employees pursuant to Office of Man-
123 

agement and Budget Circular A–76 or any other administrative 

regulation, directive, or policy. 

Section 743 continues a provision that ensures that contractors 

are not prevented from reporting waste, fraud, or abuse by signing 

confidentiality agreements that would prohibit such disclosure. 

Section 744 continues a provision prohibiting funds to any corporation with certain unpaid Federal tax liabilities unless an agency has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and 

made a determination that this further action is not necessary to 

protect the interests of the Government. 

Section 745 continues a provision prohibiting funds to any corporation that was convicted of a felony criminal violation within 

the preceding 24 months unless an agency has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and has made a determination 

that this further action is not necessary to protect the interests of 

the Government. 

Section 746 continues a provision prohibiting the expenditure of 

funds for the implementation of agreements in certain nondisclosure policies unless certain provisions are included in the policies. 

Section 747 continues a provision relating to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. 

Given the need for transparency and accountability in the Federal budgeting process, the Committee directs the Bureau to provide an informal, nonpublic full briefing at least annually before 

the relevant Appropriations subcommittee on the Bureau’s finances 

and expenditures. 

Section 748 continues a provision that addresses possible technical scorekeeping differences for fiscal year 2017 between the Office of Management and Budget and the Congressional Budget Office. 

Section 749 is a new provision to strengthen credit protections 

for deployed troops. 

Section 750 continues a provision declaring the inapplicability of 

these general provisions to title IV and title VIII. 
(124) 

TITLE VIII 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Section 801 continues the provision that allows the use of local 

funds for refunding overpayments of taxes collected and for paying 

settlements and judgments against the District of Columbia government. 

Section 802 continues the provision that prohibits the use of Federal funds for publicity or propaganda designed to support or defeat 

legislation before Congress or any State legislature. 

Section 803 continues the provision that establishes notification 

requirements for certain reprogramming and transfer requirements 

with respect to funds and specifies a timeframe for approval and 

execution of requests to reprogram and transfer local funds. 

Section 804 continues the provision that prohibits the use of Federal funds for salaries, expenses, or other costs associated with the 

offices of U.S. Senator or Representative under section 4(d) of the 

D.C. Statehood Constitutional Convention Initiatives of 1979. 

Section 805 continues, with a modification, the provision that restricts the use of official District of Columbia government vehicles 

to official duties and not between a residence and workplace, except 

under certain circumstances. 

Section 806 continues the provision that prohibits the use of Federal funds by the District of Columbia Attorney General or any 

other officer or entity of the District government to provide assistance for any petition drive or civil action which seeks to require 

Congress to provide for voting representation in Congress for the 

District of Columbia. 

Section 807 continues the provision that prohibits the use of Federal funds in this act to distribute, for the purpose of preventing 

the spread of blood borne pathogens, sterile needles or syringes in 

any location that has been determined by local public health officials or local law enforcement authorities to be inappropriate for 

such distribution. 

Section 808 continues the provision that includes a ‘‘conscience 

clause’’ on legislation that pertains to contraceptive coverage by 

health insurance plans. 

Section 809 restricts the use of Federal funds for abortion, with 

certain exceptions. 

Section 810 continues the provision requiring the CFO to submit 

a revised operating budget for agencies the CFO certifies as requiring a reallocation to address unanticipated program needs. 

Section 811 continues the provision requiring the CFO to submit 

a revised appropriated funds budget for the District of Columbia 

Schools that aligns the schools’ budgets to actual enrollment. 
125 

Section 812 continues the provision authorizing the transfer of 

local funds between operating funds and capital and enterprise 

funds. 

Section 813 continues the provision prohibiting obligations beyond the current fiscal year and prohibits transfers of funds unless 

expressly provided. 

Section 814 continues the provision that ensures that 50 percent 

of unobligated balances may remain available for certain purposes. 

Section 815 continues a provision that appropriates local funds 

during fiscal year 2018 if there is an absence of a continuing resolution or regular appropriation for the District of Columbia. Funds 

are provided under the same authorities and conditions and in the 

same manner and extent as provided for fiscal year 2017. 

Section 816 continues the provision which limits references to 

‘‘this act’’ in this title or title IV as referring to only this title and 

title IV. 
(126) 

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE 

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment to 

the House bill ‘‘which proposes an item of appropriation which is 

not made to carry out the provisions of an existing law, a treaty 

stipulation, or an act or resolution previously passed by the Senate 

during that session.’’ 

The Committee is filing an original bill, which is not covered 

under this rule, but reports this information in the spirit of full disclosure. 

Items providing funding for fiscal year 2017 which lack authorization are as follows: 

Department of the Treasury 

Departmental Offices 

Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments 

Office of the Inspector General 

Inspector General for Tax Administration 

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network 

Fiscal Service 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 

Community Development Financial Institutions Fund 

Internal Revenue Service: 

Taxpayer Services 

Enforcement 

Operations Support 

Business Systems Modernization 

Executive Office of the President 

Office of Management and Budget 

Office of National Drug Control Policy 

District of Columbia 

Federal Payment for Resident Tuition Support 

Federal Payment for the District of Columbia Water and Sewer 

Authority 

Federal Payment for Judicial Commissions 

Federal Payment for the D.C. National Guard 

Independent Agencies 

Administrative Conference of the United States 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

Election Assistance Commission 

Federal Communications Commission 

Federal Election Commission 

Federal Trade Commission 
127 

1Deposits into the Federal Buildings Fund are available for real property management and 

related activities in the amounts specified in annual appropriations laws, as provided by 40 

U.S.C. 592. 

General Services Administration: 

Federal Buildings Fund 1

Merit Systems Protection Board 

National Archives and Records Administration, National Historical Publications and Records Commission 

National Credit Union Administration: Community Development 

Revolving Loan Fund 

Office of Government Ethics 

Office of Special Counsel 

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

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on June 16, 2016, the 

Committee ordered favorably reported an original bill (S. 3067) 

making appropriations for financial services and general government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2017, and for other 

purposes, provided that the bill be subject to amendment and that 

the bill be consistent with its budget allocation, and provided that 

the Chairman of the Committee or his designee be authorized to 

offer the substance of the original bill as a Committee amendment 

in the nature of a substitute to the House companion measure, by 

a recorded vote of 30–0, a quorum being present. The vote was as 

follows: 

Yeas Nays 

Chairman Cochran 

Mr. McConnell 

Mr. Shelby 

Mr. Alexander 

Ms. Collins 

Ms. Murkowski 

Mr. Graham 

Mr. Kirk 

Mr. Blunt 

Mr. Moran 

Mr. Hoeven 

Mr. Boozman 

Mrs. Capito 

Mr. Cassidy 

Mr. Lankford 

Mr. Daines 

Ms. Mikulski 

Mr. Leahy 

Mrs. Murray 

Mrs. Feinstein 

Mr. Durbin 

Mr. Reed 

Mr. Tester 

Mr. Udall 

Mrs. Shaheen 

Mr. Merkley 
128 

Mr. Coons 

Mr. Schatz 

Ms. Baldwin 

Mr. Murphy 

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE 

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports on 

a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute or part 

of any statute include ‘‘(a) the text of the statute or part thereof 

which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a comparative print of 

that part of the bill or joint resolution making the amendment and 

of the statute or part thereof proposed to be amended, showing by 

stricken-through type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 

would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form 

recommended by the Committee.’’ 

In compliance with this rule, changes in existing law proposed to 

be made by the bill are shown as follows: existing law to be omitted 

is enclosed in black brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman. 

In compliance with this rule, changes in existing law proposed to 

be made by the bill are shown as follows: existing law to be omitted 

is enclosed in black brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman. 

TITLE 15—COMMERCE AND TRADE 

CHAPTER 41—CONSUMER CREDIT PROTECTION

SUBCHAPTER III—CREDIT REPORTING AGENCIES

§ 1681a. Definitions; rules of construction 

(q) DEFINITIONS RELATING TO FRAUD ALERTS.— 

(1) ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY CONSUMER.—* * * 

(2) FRAUD ALERT; øACTIVE DUTY ALERT¿ ACTIVE DUTY ALERT; 

ACTIVE DUTY FREEZE ALERT.—The terms ‘‘fraud alert’’ and ‘‘active 

duty alert’’ and ‘‘active duty freeze alert’’ mean a statement in the 

file of a consumer that— 

* * * * * * * 

§ 1681c–1. Identity theft prevention; fraud alerts øand active 

duty alerts¿ active duty alerts; and active duty 

freeze alerts 

(a) One-call fraud alerts 

* * * * * * * 

(c) Active duty alerts 

* * * * * * * 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(3) refer the information regarding the active duty alert to 

each of the other consumer reporting agencies described in sec-
129 

tion 1681a(p) of this title, in accordance with procedures developed under section 1681s(f) of this title. 

(d) ACTIVE DUTY FREEZE ALERTS.—Upon the direct request of 

an active duty military consumer, or an individual acting on behalf 

of or as a personal representative of an active duty military consumer, a consumer reporting agency described in section 603(p) that 

maintains a file on the active duty military consumer and has received appropriate proof of the identity of the requester, at no cost 

to the active duty military consumer while the consumer is deployed, shall— 

(1) include an active duty freeze alert in the file of that active duty military consumer, during a period of not less than 

12 months, or such longer period as the Bureau shall determine, by regulation, beginning on the date of the request, unless 

the active duty military consumer or such representative requests that such freeze alert be removed before the end of such 

period, and the agency has received appropriate proof of the 

identity of the requester for such purpose; and 

(2) during the 2-year period beginning on the date of such 

request, exclude the active duty military consumer from any list 

of consumers prepared by the consumer reporting agency and 

provided to any third party to offer credit or insurance to the 

consumer as part of a transaction that was not initiated by the 

consumer, unless the consumer requests that such exclusion be 

rescinded before the end of such period. 

ø(d)¿ (e) Procedures 

* * * * * * * 

ø(e)¿ (f) Referrals of alerts 

* * * * * * * 

ø(f)¿ (g) Duty of reseller to reconvey alert 

A reseller shall include in its report any fraud alert øor active 

duty alert¿ active duty alert, or active duty freeze alert placed in the 

file of a consumer pursuant to this section by another consumer reporting agency. 

ø(g)¿ (h) Duty of other consumer reporting agencies to provide contact information 

* * * * * * * 

ø(h)¿ (i) Limitations on use of information for credit extensions 

(1) Requirements for initial and active duty alerts 

* * * * * * * 

(2) Requirements for extended alerts 

(A) Notification 

* * * * * * * 

(B) Limitation on users 

No prospective user of a consumer report or of a credit 

score generated using the information in the file of a consumer 

that includes an extended fraud alert in accordance with this 

section may establish a new credit plan or extension of credit, 

other than under an open-end credit plan (as defined in section 
130 

1602(i) of this title), in the name of the consumer, or issue an 

additional card on an existing credit account requested by a 

consumer, or any increase in credit limit on an existing credit 

account requested by a consumer, unless the user contacts the 

consumer in person or using the contact method described in 

subparagraph (A)(ii) to confirm that the application for a new 

credit plan or increase in credit limit, or request for an additional card is not the result of identity theft. 

(3) REQUIREMENTS FOR ACTIVE DUTY FREEZE ALERTS.— 

(A) NOTIFICATION.—Each active duty freeze alert under this 

section shall include information that notifies all prospective 

users of a consumer report on the consumer to which the freeze 

alert relates that the consumer does not authorize the establishment of any new credit plan or extension of credit, other than 

under an open-end credit plan (as defined in section 103(i)), in 

the name of the consumer, or issuance of an additional card on 

an existing credit account requested by a consumer, or any increase in credit limit on an existing credit account requested by 

a consumer. 

(B) PROHIBITION ON USERS.—No prospective user of a consumer report that includes an active duty freeze alert in accordance with this section may establish a new credit plan or extension of credit, other than under an open-end credit plan (as defined in section 103(i)), in the name of the consumer, or issue 

an additional card on an existing credit account requested by 

a consumer, or grant any increase in credit limit on an existing 

credit account requested by a consumer unless the user uses reasonable policies and procedures to form a reasonable belief that 

the user knows the identity of the person making the request. 

TITLE 22—FOREIGN RELATIONS AND INTERCOURSE 

CHAPTER 69—CUBAN DEMOCRACY

§ 6005. Sanctions 

(b) Prohibitions on vessels 

ø(1) Vessels engaging in trade 

øBeginning on the 61st day after October 23, 1992, a vessel 

which enters a port or place in Cuba to engage in the trade of 

goods or services may not, within 180 days after departure from 

such port or place in Cuba, load or unload any freight at any place 

in the United States, except pursuant to a license issued by the 

Secretary of the Treasury.¿ 

ø(2)¿ (1) Vessels carrying goods or passengers to or from 

Cuba 

* * * * * * * 

ø(3)¿ (2) Inapplicability of ship stores general license 

* * * * * * * 

ø(4)¿ (3) Definitions 

* * * * * * * 
131 

CHAPTER 79—TRADE SANCTIONS REFORM AND EXPORT

ENHANCEMENT

§ 7207. Prohibition on United States assistance øand financing¿ 

ø(a) Prohibition on United States assistance¿ 

ø(1) In general¿ 

øNotwithstanding¿ 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 

no United States Government assistance, including United States 

foreign assistance, United States export assistance, and any United 

States credit or guarantees shall be available for exports to Cuba 

or for commercial exports to Iran, Libya, North Korea, or Sudan. 

ø(2)¿ (b) Rule of construction 

Nothing in øparagraph (1)¿ subsection (a) shall be construed to 

alter, modify, or otherwise affect the provisions of section 6039 of 

this title or any other provision of law relating to Cuba in effect 

on the day before October 28, 2000. 

ø(3)¿ (c) Waiver 

The President may waive the application of øparagraph (1)¿ 

subsection (a) with respect to Iran, Libya, North Korea, and Sudan 

to the degree the President determines that it is in the national security interest of the United States to do so, or for humanitarian 

reasons. 

ø(b) Prohibition on financing of agricultural sales to Cuba 

ø(1) In general 

øNo United States person may provide payment or financing terms for sales of agricultural commodities or products to 

Cuba or any person in Cuba, except in accordance with the following terms (notwithstanding part 515 of title 31, Code of 

Federal Regulations, or any other provision of law): 

ø(A) Payment of cash in advance. 

ø(B) Financing by third country financial institutions 

(excluding United States persons or Government of Cuba 

entities), except that such financing may be confirmed or 

advised by a United States financial institution. 

øNothing in this paragraph authorizes payment terms or trade 

financing involving a debit or credit to an account of a person 

located in Cuba or of the Government of Cuba maintained on 

the books of a United States depository institution. 

ø(2) Penalties 

øAny private person or entity that violates paragraph (1) 

shall be subject to the penalties provided in the Trading With 

the Enemy Act for violations under that Act. 

ø(3) Administration and enforcement 

øThe President shall issue such regulations as are necessary to carry out this section, except that the President, in 

lieu of issuing new regulations, may apply any regulations in 

effect on October 28, 2000, pursuant to the Trading With the 

Enemy Act, with respect to the conduct prohibited in paragraph (1). 
132 

ø(4) Definitions 

øIn this subsection— 

ø(A) the term ‘‘financing’’ includes any loan or extension of credit; 

ø(B) the term ‘‘United States depository institution’’ 

means any entity (including its foreign branches or subsidiaries) organized under the laws of any jurisdiction 

within the United States, or any agency, office or branch 

located in the United States of a foreign entity, that is engaged primarily in the business of banking (including a 

bank, savings bank, savings association, credit union, trust 

company, or United States bank holding company); and 

ø(C) the term ‘‘United States person’’ means the Federal Government, any State or local government, or any 

private person or entity of the United States.¿ 

TITLE 40—PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS 

SUBTITLE II—PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS 

PART A—GENERAL

CHAPTER 33—ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND ALTERATION

§ 3314. Delegation 

(a) WHEN ALLOWED.—The carrying out of the duties and powers of the Administrator of General Services under this chapter, in 

accordance with standards the Administrator prescribes— 

(1) shall, except for the authority contained in section 

3305(b) of this title, be delegated on request to the appropriate 

øexecutive¿ Federal agency when the estimated cost of the 

project does not exceed $100,000; and 

(2) may be delegated to the appropriate øexecutive¿ Federal agency when the Administrator determines that delegation will promote efficiency and economy. 

JUDICIAL IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 1990, 

PUBLIC LAW 101–650 

SEC. 203. APPOINTMENT AND NUMBER OF DISTRICT JUDGES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—* * * 

* * * * * * * 

(c) TEMPORARY JUDGESHIPS.—The President shall appoint, by 

and with the advice and consent of the Senate— 

(1) 1 additional district judge for the eastern district of 

California; 

* * * * * * * 

(12) 1 additional district judge for the eastern district of 

Virginia. 

Except with respect to the district of Kansas, the western district 

of Michigan, the eastern district of Pennsylvania, the district of 
133 

Hawaii, and the northern district of Ohio, the first vacancy in the 

office of district judge in each of the judicial districts named in this 

subsection, occurring 10 years or more after the confirmation date 

of the judge named to fill the temporary judgeship created by this 

subsection, shall not be filled. The first vacancy in the office of district judge in the district of Kansas occurring ø25 years and 6 

months¿ 26 years and 6 months or more after the confirmation 

date of the judge named to fill the temporary judgeship created for 

such district under this subsection, shall not be filled. The first vacancy in the office of district judge in the western district of Michigan, occurring after December 1, 1995, shall not be filled. The first 

vacancy in the office of district judge in the eastern district of 

Pennsylvania, occurring 5 years or more after the confirmation 

date of the judge named to fill the temporary judgeship created for 

such district under this subsection, shall not be filled. The first vacancy in the office of district judge in the northern district of Ohio 

occurring 19 years or more after the confirmation date of the judge 

named to fill the temporary judgeship created under this subsection shall not be filled. The first vacancy in the office of the district judge in the district of Hawaii occurring 21 years and 6 

months or more after the confirmation date of the judge named to 

fill the temporary judgeship created under this subsection shall not 

be filled. For districts named in this subsection for which multiple 

judgeships are created by this Act, the last of those judgeships 

filled shall be the judgeships created under this section. 

21ST CENTURY DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE APPROPRIATIONS AUTHORIZATON ACT, PUBLIC LAW 107–273 

SEC. 312. ADDITIONAL FEDERAL JUDGESHIPS. 

(a) PERMANENT DISTRICT JUDGES FOR THE DISTRICT COURTS.— 

* * * * * * * 

(c) TEMPORARY JUDGESHIPS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.* * * 

* * * * * * * 

(2) VACANCIES NOT FILLED.—The first vacancy in the office 

of district judge in each of the offices of district judge authorized by this subsection, except in the case of the central district 

of California and the western district of North Carolina, occurring ø14 years¿ 15 years or more after the confirmation date 

of the judge named to fill the temporary district judgeship created in the applicable district by this subsection, shall not be 

filled. The first vacancy in the office of district judge in the 

central district of California occurring ø13 years and 6 

months¿ 14 years and 6 months or more after the confirmation 

date of the judge named to fill the temporary district judgeship 

created in that district by this subsection, shall not be filled. 

The first vacancy in the office of district judge in the western 

district of North Carolina occurring ø12 years¿ 13 years or 

more after the confirmation date of the judge named to fill the 

temporary district judgeship created in that district by this 

subsection, shall not be filled. 
134 

UNIVERSAL SERVICE ANTIDEFICIENCY TEMPORARY 

SUSPENSION ACT, PUBLIC LAW 108–494 

TITLE III—UNIVERSAL SERVICE 

SEC. 302. APPLICATION OF CERTAIN TITLE 31 PROVISIONS TO UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—During the period beginning on the date of 

enactment of this Act and ending on øDecember 31, 2017¿ December 31, 2018, section 1341 and subchapter II of chapter 15 of title 

31, United States Code, do not apply— 

* * * * * * * 

(b) POST-2005 FULFILLMENT OF PROTECTED OBLIGATIONS.—Section 1341 and subchapter II of chapter 15 of title 31, United States 

Code, do not apply after øDecember 31, 2017¿ December 31, 2018, 

to an expenditure or obligation described in subsection (a)(2) made 

or authorized during the period described in subsection (a). 

TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, HOUSING AND URBAN 

DEVELOPMENT, THE JUDICIARY, THE DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006, PUBLIC LAW 109–115 

TITLE IV 

THE JUDICIARY 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—THE JUDICIARY

SEC. 406. The existing judgeship for the eastern district of Missouri authorized by section 203(c) of the Judicial Improvements Act 

of 1990 (Public Law 101–650, 104 Stat. 5089) as amended by Public 

Law 105–53, as of the effective date of this Act, shall be extended. 

The first vacancy in the office of district judge in this district occurring ø23 years and 6 months¿ 24 years and 6 months or more after 

the confirmation date of the judge named to fill the temporary 

judgeship created by section 203(c) shall not be filled. 

TEMPORARY BANKRUPTCY JUDGESHIPS EXTENSION 

ACT OF 2012, PUBLIC LAW 112–121 

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY OFFICE OF BANKRUPTCY JUDGES 

IN CERTAIN JUDICIAL DISTRICTS. 

(a) TEMPORARY OFFICE OF BANKRUPTCY JUDGES AUTHORIZED

BY PUBLIC LAW 109–8.— 

(1) EXTENSIONS.—* * * 

* * * * * * * 

(2) VACANCIES.— 

(A) SINGLE VACANCIES.—Except as provided in øsubparagraphs (B), (C), (D), and (E)¿ subparagraphs (B), (C), 

(D), (E), (F), (G), and (H), the 1st vacancy in the office of 
135 

a bankruptcy judge for each district specified in paragraph 

(1)— 

* * * * * * * 

(C) DISTRICT OF DELAWARE.—The 1st, 2d, 3d, and 4th 

vacancies in the office of bankruptcy judge in the district 

of Delaware— 

(i) in the case of the 1st and 2d vacancies, occurring more than 6 years after the date of the enactment 

of this Act, 

ø(i)¿ (ii) in the case of the 3d and 4th vacancies, 

occurring 5 years or more after the respective 1st, 2d, 

3d, and 4th appointment dates of the bankruptcy 

judges appointed under paragraph (1)(F); and 

ø(ii)¿ (iii) resulting from the death, retirement, 

resignation, or removal of a bankruptcy judge; 

shall not be filled. 

(D) SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA.—The 1st and 2d 

vacancies in the office of bankruptcy judge in the southern 

district of Florida— 

(i) occurring ø5 years¿ 6 years or more after the 

respective 1st and 2d appointment dates of the bankruptcy judges appointed under paragraph (1)(D); and 

* * * * * * * 

(E) DISTRICT OF MARYLAND.—* * * 

(i) * * * 

(ii) resulting from the death, retirement, resignation, or removal of a bankruptcy judge, 

shall not be filled. 

(F) EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN.—The 1st vacancy 

in the office of a bankruptcy judge for the eastern district 

of Michigan— 

(i) occurring 6 years or more after the date of the 

enactment of this Act, and 

(ii) resulting from the death, retirement, resignation, or removal of a bankruptcy judge, shall not be 

filled. 

(G) DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO.—The 1st vacancy in the 

office of a bankruptcy judge for the district of Puerto Rico— 

(i) occurring 6 years or more after the date of the 

enactment of this Act, and 

(ii) resulting from the death, retirement, resignation, or removal of a bankruptcy judge, shall not be 

filled. 

(H) EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA.—The 1st vacancy 

in the office of a bankruptcy judge for the eastern district 

of Virginia— 

(i) occurring 6 years or more after the date of the 

enactment of this Act, and 
136 

(ii) resulting from the death, retirement, resignation, or removal of a bankruptcy judge, shall not be 

filled. 

BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL 

PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 

308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93–344, AS AMENDED 

[In millions of dollars] 

Budget authority Outlays 

Committee 

allocation 

Amount 

in bill 

Committee 

allocation 

Amount 

in bill 

Comparison of amounts in the bill with the subcommittee allocation for 2017: Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government: 

Mandatory ............................................................... 21,937 21,937 21,930 1 21,930 

Discretionary ........................................................... 22,393 22,552 23,325 1 23,446 

Security .......................................................... 33 33 NA NA 

Nonsecurity .................................................... 22,360 22,519 NA NA 

Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2017 ........................................................................ .................... .................... .................... 2 39,620 

2018 ........................................................................ .................... .................... .................... 3,847 

2019 ........................................................................ .................... .................... .................... 739 

2020 ........................................................................ .................... .................... .................... 193 

2021 and future years ........................................... .................... .................... .................... 192

Financial assistance to State and local governments 

for 2017 ...................................................................... NA 622 NA 2 471 

1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

NA: Not applicable. 

NOTE.—Consistent with the funding recommended in the bill for disaster relief funding and in accordance with section 

251(b)(2)(D) of the BBEDCA of 1985, the Committee anticipates that the Budget Committee will provide a revised 302(a) allocation 

for the Committee on Appropriations reflecting an upward adjustment of $159,000,000 in budget authority plus associated outlays. 
137 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2016 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2017 

appropriation Budget estimate 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Departmental Offices 

Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................................... 222,500 334,376 347,376 ∂124,876 ∂13,000 

Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence ................................................................................................. ............................ (117,000 ) (123,000 ) (∂123,000 ) (∂6,000 ) 

Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence .......................................................................................................... 117,000 ............................ ............................ ¥117,000 ............................Cybersecurity Enhancement Account ......................................................................................................................... ............................ 109,827 47,743 ∂47,743 ¥62,084 Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments Programs ................................................................................ 5,000 5,000 5,000 ............................ ............................Office of Inspector General ........................................................................................................................................ 35,416 37,044 37,044 ∂1,628 ............................Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration ................................................................................................... 167,275 169,634 169,634 ∂2,359 ............................Special Inspector General for TARP ........................................................................................................................... 40,671 41,160 41,160 ∂489 ............................Financial Crimes Enforcement Network ..................................................................................................................... 112,979 115,003 114,479 ∂1,500 ¥524 

Subtotal, Departmental Offices .................................................................................................................... 700,841 812,044 762,436 ∂61,595 ¥49,608 

Treasury Forfeiture Fund (rescission) ......................................................................................................................... ¥700,000 ¥657,000 ¥657,000 ∂43,000 ............................

Total, Departmental Offices .......................................................................................................................... 841 155,044 105,436 ∂104,595 ¥49,608 

Bureau of the Fiscal Service ...................................................................................................................................... 363,850 353,057 353,057 ¥10,793 ............................Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau ............................................................................................................. 106,439 106,439 111,439 ∂5,000 ∂5,000 Franchise Fund ........................................................................................................................................................... ............................ 3,000 ............................ ............................ ¥3,000 Community Development Financial Institutions Fund Program Account .................................................................. 233,523 245,923 233,523 ............................ ¥12,400 Payment of Government Losses in Shipment ............................................................................................................ 2,000 2,000 2,000 ............................ ............................

Total, Department of the Treasury, non-IRS ................................................................................................ 706,653 865,463 805,455 ∂98,802 ¥60,008 

Internal Revenue Service 

Taxpayer Services ....................................................................................................................................................... 2,333,376 2,406,318 2,156,554 ¥176,822 ¥249,764 Enforcement ................................................................................................................................................................ 4,864,936 4,984,919 4,860,000 ¥4,936 ¥124,919 
138 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2016 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2017 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Program integrity initiatives ............................................................................................................................. ............................ 231,344 ............................ ............................ ¥231,344 

Subtotal ......................................................................................................................................................... 4,864,936 5,216,263 4,860,000 ¥4,936 ¥356,263 

Operations Support ..................................................................................................................................................... 3,746,688 4,030,695 3,638,446 ¥108,242 ¥392,249 

Program integrity initiatives ............................................................................................................................. ............................ 283,404 ............................ ............................ ¥283,404 

Subtotal ......................................................................................................................................................... 3,746,688 4,314,099 3,638,446 ¥108,242 ¥675,653 

Business systems modernization ............................................................................................................................... 290,000 343,415 290,000 ............................ ¥53,415 General provision ........................................................................................................................................................ ............................ ............................ 290,000 ∂290,000 ∂290,000 

Total, Internal Revenue Service .................................................................................................................... 11,235,000 12,280,095 11,235,000 ............................ ¥1,045,095 Total, title I, Department of the Treasury .................................................................................................... 11,941,653 13,145,558 12,040,455 ∂98,802 ¥1,105,103 

Appropriations ...................................................................................................................................... (12,641,653 ) (13,802,558 ) (12,697,455 ) (∂55,802 ) (¥1,105,103 ) Rescissions .......................................................................................................................................... (¥700,000 ) (¥657,000 ) (¥657,000 ) (∂43,000 ) ............................

TITLE II—EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT 

The White House 

Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................................... 55,000 55,214 55,214 ∂214 ............................Executive Residence at the White House: 

Operating expenses ........................................................................................................................................... 12,723 12,723 12,723 ............................ ............................White House repair and restoration .................................................................................................................. 750 750 750 ............................ ............................

Subtotal ......................................................................................................................................................... 13,473 13,473 13,473 ............................ ............................

Council of Economic Advisers .................................................................................................................................... 4,195 4,201 4,201 ∂6 ............................National Security Council and Homeland Security Council ....................................................................................... 12,800 13,069 12,800 ............................ ¥269 Office of Administration ............................................................................................................................................. 96,116 96,116 96,116 ............................ ............................
139 

Presidential transition administrative support .......................................................................................................... ............................ 7,582 7,582 ∂7,582 ............................

Total, The White House ................................................................................................................................. 181,584 189,655 189,386 ∂7,802 ¥269 

Office of Management and Budget ........................................................................................................................... 95,000 100,725 95,000 ............................ ¥5,725 

Office of National Drug Control Policy 

Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................................... 20,047 19,274 19,274 ¥773 ............................High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program ......................................................................................................... 250,000 196,410 255,000 ∂5,000 ∂58,590 Other Federal Drug Control Programs ........................................................................................................................ 109,810 98,480 109,871 ∂61 ∂11,391 

Total, Office of National Drug Control Policy ............................................................................................... 379,857 314,164 384,145 ∂4,288 ∂69,981 

Unanticipated needs .................................................................................................................................................. 800 1,000 800 ............................ ¥200 Information Technology Oversight and Reform .......................................................................................................... 30,000 35,200 30,000 ............................ ¥5,200 Special Assistance to the President and Official Residence of the Vice President: 

Salaries and expenses ...................................................................................................................................... 4,228 4,228 4,228 ............................ ............................Operating expenses ........................................................................................................................................... 299 299 299 ............................ ............................

Subtotal ......................................................................................................................................................... 4,527 4,527 4,527 ............................ ............................Total, title II, Executive Office of the President and Funds Appropriated to the President ....................... 691,768 645,271 703,858 ∂12,090 ∂58,587 

TITLE III—THE JUDICIARY 

Supreme Court of the United States 

Salaries and expenses: 

Salaries of Justices ........................................................................................................................................... 2,557 3,000 3,000 ∂443 ............................Other salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................. 75,838 76,668 76,668 ∂830 ............................

Subtotal ......................................................................................................................................................... 78,395 79,668 79,668 ∂1,273 ............................

Care of the building and grounds ............................................................................................................................. 9,964 14,868 14,868 ∂4,904 ............................

Total, Supreme Court of the United States .................................................................................................. 88,359 94,536 94,536 ∂6,177 ............................

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

Salaries and expenses: 

Salaries of judges ............................................................................................................................................. 2,922 3,000 3,000 ∂78 ............................
140 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2016 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2017 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Other salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................. 30,872 30,108 30,108 ¥764 ............................

Total, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit .................................................................... 33,794 33,108 33,108 ¥686 ............................

United States Court of International Trade 

Salaries and expenses: 

Salaries of judges ............................................................................................................................................. 2,005 2,000 2,000 ¥5 ............................Other salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................. 18,160 18,462 18,462 ∂302 ............................

Total, U.S. Court of International Trade ....................................................................................................... 20,165 20,462 20,462 ∂297 ............................

Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services 

Salaries and expenses: 

Salaries of judges and bankruptcy judges ....................................................................................................... 417,000 424,000 424,000 ∂7,000 ............................Other salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................. 4,918,969 5,045,785 5,045,785 ∂126,816 ............................

Subtotal ......................................................................................................................................................... 5,335,969 5,469,785 5,469,785 ∂133,816 ............................

Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund .................................................................................................................. 6,050 6,260 6,260 ∂210 ............................Defender services ....................................................................................................................................................... 1,004,949 1,056,326 1,054,468 ∂49,519 ¥1,858 Fees of jurors and commissioners ............................................................................................................................. 44,199 43,723 39,929 ¥4,270 ¥3,794 Court security ............................................................................................................................................................. 538,196 565,388 565,388 ∂27,192 ............................

Total, Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services ....................................................... 6,929,363 7,141,482 7,135,830 ∂206,467 ¥5,652 

Administrative Office of the United States Courts 

Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................................... 85,665 87,748 87,748 ∂2,083 ............................
141 

Federal Judicial Center 

Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................................... 27,719 28,335 28,335 ∂616 ............................

United States Sentencing Commission 

Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................................... 17,570 18,150 18,150 ∂580 ............................

Total, title III, the Judiciary .......................................................................................................................... 7,202,635 7,423,821 7,418,169 ∂215,534 ¥5,652 

TITLE IV—DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Federal Payment for Resident Tuition Support .......................................................................................................... 40,000 40,000 30,000 ¥10,000 ¥10,000 Federal Payment for Emergency Planning and Security Costs in the District of Columbia .................................... 13,000 34,895 34,895 ∂21,895 ............................Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Courts ................................................................................................ 274,401 274,681 274,681 ∂280 ............................Federal Payment for Defender Services in District of Columbia Courts ................................................................... 49,890 49,890 49,890 ............................ ............................Federal Payment to the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia ................ 244,763 248,008 248,008 ∂3,245 ............................Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Public Defender Service .................................................................... 40,889 41,829 41,829 ∂940 ............................Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority ................................................................ 14,000 14,000 14,000 ............................ ............................Federal Payment to the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council ................................................................................ 1,900 2,000 2,000 ∂100 ............................Federal Payment for Judicial Commissions ............................................................................................................... 565 585 585 ∂20 ............................Federal Payment for School Improvement ................................................................................................................. 45,000 43,200 45,000 ............................ ∂1,800 Federal Payment for the D.C. National Guard ........................................................................................................... 435 450 450 ∂15 ............................Federal Payment for Testing and Treatment of HIV/AIDS ......................................................................................... 5,000 5,000 5,000 ............................ ............................Federal Payment for the Federal City Shelter ............................................................................................................ ............................ 9,000 ............................ ............................ ¥9,000 

Total, Title IV, District of Columbia ............................................................................................................. 729,843 763,538 746,338 ∂16,495 ¥17,200 

TITLE V—OTHER INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

Administrative Conference of the United States ....................................................................................................... 3,100 3,200 3,100 ............................ ¥100 Commodity Futures Trading Commission .................................................................................................................. 250,000 330,000 250,000 ............................ ¥80,000 Consumer Product Safety Commission ...................................................................................................................... 125,000 130,500 124,000 ¥1,000 ¥6,500 Election Assistance Commission ................................................................................................................................ 9,600 9,800 9,600 ............................ ¥200 

Federal Communications Commission 

Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................................... 384,012 358,286 341,315 ¥42,697 ¥16,971 Offsetting fee collections ........................................................................................................................................... ¥384,012 ¥358,286 ¥341,315 ∂42,697 ∂16,971 

Direct appropriation ...................................................................................................................................... ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................
142 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2016 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2017 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 

Office of Inspector General (by transfer) ................................................................................................................... (34,568 ) (35,958 ) (35,958 ) (∂1,390 ) ............................Deposit Insurance Fund (transfer) ............................................................................................................................. (¥34,568 ) (¥35,958 ) (¥35,958 ) (¥1,390 ) ............................Federal Election Commission ..................................................................................................................................... 76,119 80,540 79,119 ∂3,000 ¥1,421 Federal Labor Relations Authority .............................................................................................................................. 26,200 27,062 26,200 ............................ ¥862 

Federal Trade Commission 

Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................................... 306,900 342,000 306,900 ............................ ¥35,100 Offsetting fee collections (mergers) .......................................................................................................................... ¥124,000 ¥125,000 ¥125,000 ¥1,000 ............................Offsetting fee collections (telephone) ........................................................................................................................ ¥14,000 ¥15,000 ¥15,000 ¥1,000 ............................

Direct appropriation ...................................................................................................................................... 168,900 202,000 166,900 ¥2,000 ¥35,100 

General Services Administration 

Federal Buildings Fund 

Limitations on availability of revenue: 

Construction and acquisition of facilities ........................................................................................................ 1,607,738 1,330,522 764,749 ¥842,989 ¥565,773 Repairs and alterations .................................................................................................................................... 735,331 841,617 632,539 ¥102,792 ¥209,078 Rental of space ................................................................................................................................................. 5,579,055 5,655,581 5,645,581 ∂66,526 ¥10,000 Building operations ........................................................................................................................................... 2,274,000 2,350,618 2,335,000 ∂61,000 ¥15,618 

Subtotal, Limitations on availability of revenue .......................................................................................... 10,196,124 10,178,338 9,377,869 ¥818,255 ¥800,469 

Rental income to fund ............................................................................................................................................... ¥9,807,722 ¥10,178,338 ¥10,178,338 ¥370,616 ............................

Total, Federal Buildings Fund ...................................................................................................................... 388,402 ............................ ¥800,469 ¥1,188,871 ¥800,469 

Government-wide policy ............................................................................................................................................. 58,000 64,497 60,000 ∂2,000 ¥4,497 Operating expenses .................................................................................................................................................... 58,560 50,174 58,560 ............................ ∂8,386 Civilian Board of Contract Appeals ........................................................................................................................... ............................ 9,275 ............................ ............................ ¥9,275 
143 

Office of Inspector General ........................................................................................................................................ 65,000 66,000 65,000 ............................ ¥1,000 Allowances and office staff for former Presidents .................................................................................................... 3,277 3,865 3,865 ∂588 ............................Federal Citizen Services Fund .................................................................................................................................... 55,894 58,428 55,894 ............................ ¥2,534 Expenses, Presidential transition ............................................................................................................................... ............................ 9,500 9,500 ∂9,500 ............................Pre-Election Presidential transition ........................................................................................................................... 13,278 ............................ ............................ ¥13,278 ............................Information Technology Modernization Fund .............................................................................................................. ............................ 100,000 ............................ ............................ ¥100,000 

Total, General Services Administration ........................................................................................................ 642,411 361,739 ¥547,650 ¥1,190,061 ¥909,389 

Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation ................................................................................................................... 1,000 ............................ 1,000 ............................ ∂1,000 

Merit Systems Protection Board 

Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................................... 44,490 45,083 44,490 ............................ ¥593 Limitation on administrative expenses ...................................................................................................................... 2,345 2,345 2,345 ............................ ............................

Total, Merit Systems Protection Board ......................................................................................................... 46,835 47,428 46,835 ............................ ¥593 

Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation 

Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Trust Fund ...................................................................................................... 1,995 1,895 1,895 ¥100 ............................Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund .................................................................................................................... 3,400 3,249 3,249 ¥151 ............................

Total, Morris K. Udall and Stewart L Udall Foundation ............................................................................... 5,395 5,144 5,144 ¥251 ............................

National Archives and Records Administration 

Operating expenses .................................................................................................................................................... 379,393 380,634 380,634 ∂1,241 ............................

Reduction of debt .............................................................................................................................................. ¥21,208 ¥23,000 ¥23,049 ¥1,841 ¥49 

Subtotal ......................................................................................................................................................... 358,185 357,634 357,585 ¥600 ¥49 

Office of the Inspector General .................................................................................................................................. 4,180 4,801 4,801 ∂621 ............................Repairs and restoration ............................................................................................................................................. 7,500 7,500 7,500 ............................ ............................National Historical Publications and Records Commission Grants Program ............................................................ 5,000 5,000 5,000 ............................ ............................

Total, National Archives and Records Administration ................................................................................. 374,865 374,935 374,886 ∂21 ¥49 

NCUA Community Development Revolving Loan Fund ............................................................................................... 2,000 2,000 2,000 ............................ ............................Office of Government Ethics ...................................................................................................................................... 15,742 16,090 16,090 ∂348 ............................
144 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2016 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2017 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Office of Personnel Management 

Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................................... 120,688 144,867 120,688 ............................ ¥24,179 

Limitation on administrative expenses ............................................................................................................. 124,550 144,653 124,550 ............................ ¥20,103 

Subtotal, Salaries and Expenses .................................................................................................................. 245,238 289,520 245,238 ............................ ¥44,282 

Office of Inspector General ........................................................................................................................................ 4,365 5,072 5,072 ∂707 ............................

Limitation on administrative expenses ............................................................................................................. 22,479 26,662 25,112 ∂2,633 ¥1,550 

Subtotal, Office of Inspector General ........................................................................................................... 26,844 31,734 30,184 ∂3,340 ¥1,550 Total, Office of Personnel Management ....................................................................................................... 272,082 321,254 275,422 ∂3,340 ¥45,832 

Office of Special Counsel ........................................................................................................................................... 24,119 26,535 24,119 ............................ ¥2,416 Postal Regulatory Commission ................................................................................................................................... 15,200 17,726 15,200 ............................ ¥2,526 Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board .............................................................................................................. 21,297 10,081 10,081 ¥11,216 ............................Recovery and Accountability Transparency Board ..................................................................................................... ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................Securities and Exchange Commission ....................................................................................................................... 1,605,000 1,781,457 1,605,000 ............................ ¥176,457 

SEC fees ............................................................................................................................................................ ¥1,605,000 ¥1,781,457 ¥1,605,000 ............................ ∂176,457 SEC Reserve Fund (rescission) ......................................................................................................................... ¥25,000 ............................ ............................ ∂25,000 ............................SEC Reserve Fund (limitation) .......................................................................................................................... ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................

Selective Service System ............................................................................................................................................ 22,703 22,900 22,900 ∂197 ............................

Small Business Administration 

Salaries and expenses ............................................................................................................................................... 268,000 275,033 268,000 ............................ ¥7,033 Entrepreneurial Development Programs ..................................................................................................................... 231,100 230,600 231,100 ............................ ∂500 Office of Inspector General ........................................................................................................................................ 19,900 19,900 19,900 ............................ ............................Office of Advocacy ...................................................................................................................................................... 9,120 9,320 9,120 ............................ ¥200 Business Loans Program Account: 

Direct loans subsidy .......................................................................................................................................... 3,338 4,338 4,338 ∂1,000 ............................
145 

Guaranteed loans subsidy ................................................................................................................................. ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................Administrative expenses .................................................................................................................................... 152,726 152,726 152,726 ............................ ............................

Total, Business loans program account ....................................................................................................... 156,064 157,064 157,064 ∂1,000 ............................

Disaster Loans Program Account: 

Administrative expenses .................................................................................................................................... 186,858 27,148 27,148 ¥159,710 ............................

Disaster relief category ............................................................................................................................ ............................ 158,829 158,829 ∂158,829 ............................

Total, Small Business Administration ................................................................................................. 871,042 877,894 871,161 ∂119 ¥6,733 

Disaster Relief Category ........................................................................................................................... ............................ 158,829 158,829 ∂158,829 ............................

General provision (rescission) (Sec. 521) .................................................................................................................. ............................ ¥55,000 ¥55,000 ¥55,000 ............................

United States Postal Service 

Payment to the Postal Service Fund .......................................................................................................................... 55,075 63,658 48,422 ¥6,653 ¥15,236 

Advance appropriations ..................................................................................................................................... ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................

Total, Payment to the Postal Service Fund .................................................................................................. 55,075 63,658 48,422 ¥6,653 ¥15,236 

Office of Inspector General ........................................................................................................................................ 248,600 258,800 252,600 ∂4,000 ¥6,200 

Total, United States Postal Service .............................................................................................................. 303,675 322,458 301,022 ¥2,653 ¥21,436 

United States Tax Court ............................................................................................................................................. 51,300 53,861 53,861 ∂2,561 ............................

Total, title V, Independent Agencies ............................................................................................................ 3,303,585 3,188,147 2,075,990 ¥1,227,595 ¥1,112,157 

Appropriations ...................................................................................................................................... (3,328,585 ) (3,084,318 ) (1,972,161 ) (¥1,356,424 ) (¥1,112,157 ) Rescissions .......................................................................................................................................... (¥25,000 ) (¥55,000 ) (¥55,000 ) (¥30,000 ) ............................Disaster relief category ........................................................................................................................ ............................ (158,829 ) (158,829 ) (∂158,829 ) ............................Advances .............................................................................................................................................. ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................

(By transfer) .................................................................................................................................................. (34,568 ) (35,958 ) (35,958 ) (∂1,390 ) ............................

TITLE VI—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Mandatory appropriations (Sec. 619) ........................................................................................................................ 20,961,450 21,376,450 21,376,450 ∂415,000 ............................GSA Cybersecurity (rescission) ................................................................................................................................... ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................

Total, title VI, General Provisions ................................................................................................................. 20,961,450 21,376,450 21,376,450 ∂415,000 ............................
146 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2016 appropriation Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2017 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Grand total .................................................................................................................................................... 44,830,934 46,542,785 44,361,260 ¥469,674 ¥2,181,525 

Appropriations ...................................................................................................................................... (45,555,934 ) (47,095,956 ) (44,914,431 ) (¥641,503 ) (¥2,181,525 ) Rescissions .......................................................................................................................................... (¥725,000 ) (¥712,000 ) (¥712,000 ) (∂13,000 ) ............................Disaster relief category ........................................................................................................................ ............................ (158,829 ) (158,829 ) (∂158,829 ) ............................Advances .............................................................................................................................................. ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................

(By transfer) .................................................................................................................................................. (34,568 ) (35,958 ) (35,958 ) (∂1,390 ) ............................

Æ