81–455 

113TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 113–116 

AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG 

ADMINISTRATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2014 

JUNE 18, 2013.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. ADERHOLT, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

MINORITY AND ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 2410] 

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in 

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

Related Agencies for fiscal year 2014. 

OVERVIEW 

The fiscal year 2014 discretionary spending in this bill totals $19,450,000,000, which is a decrease of $1,286,294,000 below the 

fiscal year 2013 enacted level of $20,736,294,000 (defined as the 

amount provided within Public Law 113–6 and excluding emergency funding, disaster relief adjustments, the 251A sequester, and 

any other adjustments imposed by the Office of Management and 

Budget pursuant to section 3004 of Public Law 113–6), and a decrease of $515,818,000 below the budget request level of 

$19,965,818,000. The President’s request did not include funding 

for Food for Peace, Title II grants. Overall, the bill results in a reduction of more than six percent in discretionary spending from fiscal year 2013. 

The funding levels provided in this appropriations bill continue 

to demonstrate how seriously this Committee takes the responsibility to rein in discretionary spending. The Committee’s actions to 

reduce spending on the many agencies, programs, and activities 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

funded in this bill will help address the Nation’s debt, deficit, and 

economic challenges. 

OVERSIGHT AND HEARINGS

Consistent with the Committee on Appropriations Oversight 

Plan, as approved and transmitted to the Committee on Oversight 

and Government Reform and the Committee on House Administration in January 2013, the Subcommittee began the fiscal year 2014 

process by maintaining the Committee’s strong commitment to 

comprehensive oversight of Federal discretionary spending under 

the Subcommittee’s jurisdiction. In order to thoroughly review the 

President’s budget request for fiscal year 2014 and examine how 

funds appropriated in previous years had been managed, the Subcommittee held 11 hearings for the mission areas, agencies, and 

programs of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Food 

and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The hearings included: 

USDA Food Safety—March 13, 2013 

USDA Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services—March 14, 

2013 

USDA Inspector General—March 21, 2013 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission—April 12, 2013 

Secretary of Agriculture—April 16, 2013 

USDA Research, Education, and Economics—April 17, 2013 

USDA Marketing and Regulatory Programs—April 18, 2013 

USDA Rural Development—April 24, 2013 

USDA Natural Resources and Environment—April 24, 2013 

USDA Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services—April 25, 2013 

Food and Drug Administration—April 26, 2013 

The Subcommittee began its fiscal year 2014 hearings with 

USDA’s Food Safety mission area to investigate the potential for 

meat inspector furloughs to limit the nation’s meat and poultry 

supply and cause economic hardship for livestock and poultry producers. The Subcommittee next called before it the Food, Nutrition, 

and Consumer Services mission area to review USDA’s management of the $103 billion in annual spending for domestic feeding 

programs. Unfortunately, these programs have high rates of waste, 

fraud, and abuse, and even though spending on them increases 

every year, management improvements have been slow to come. 

Continuing the discussion, the Subcommittee heard from USDA’s 

Office of the Inspector General on its work to find and deter this 

waste, fraud, and abuse, and to improve the administration of 

USDA’s numerous agencies and programs. In its hearing with 

CFTC, the Subcommittee questioned the agency’s emphasis on hiring staff rather than improving technology systems to provide the 

agency a more efficient way to do business. The Subcommittee took 

its concerns directly to USDA Secretary Vilsack regarding the accounting and budget gimmicks in the budget request that are used 

to claim savings and sought answers on the Department’s priorities. Agricultural research is a critical part of USDA and is broadly supported by the Subcommittee. However, the Subcommittee 

was disappointed USDA did not comply with the request for additional information on certain grant programs so the Subcommittee 

could improve its oversight activities. There is a significant opportunity within USDA’s Marketing and Regulatory Program mission 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

area to increase sales of U.S. agricultural products, thus supporting 

U.S. jobs and industry. Yet, the administration nonsensically proposed to reduce funding for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), which is vital to this effort, and was discussed in detail in this hearing. The Subcommittee focused once 

again on the struggles of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to right the wrongs in its financial management and accounting practices and discussed Rural Development’s proposal to 

reduce funding by $106 million for its water and waste disposal 

program, which has a backlog greater than $3 billion. Rural Development’s proposals to create a new, unproven $55 million grant 

program through the appropriations process and cuts for rural 

housing programs received skeptical attention. Altogether, the administration’s proposal is bad news for families and communities in 

rural America. The Subcommittee discussed how agricultural exports continue to be a bright spot in our nation’s trade balance, but 

that the administration failed to capitalize on that success by doing 

more in this area. Instead the Department focused on an effort to 

move the Food for Peace program from USDA to the U.S. Agency 

for International Development; an idea that has little congressional 

support. In the final hearing on FDA, the Subcommittee delved 

into sequestration in an attempt to reconcile the conflicting information provided by the agency and administration regarding sequestration’s effect on food and drug safety. 

The Subcommittee will monitor the issues identified and discussed at the hearings, as well as others relevant to the management of USDA, FDA, CFTC, and the Farm Credit Administration 

and will maintain its oversight efforts throughout the 113th Congress to ensure taxpayer dollars are being invested wisely and prudently on behalf of the American people. 

TITLE I 

AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS 

PRODUCTION, PROCESSING, AND MARKETING

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $45,222,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 44,148,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 40,516,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥4,706,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥3,632,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

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

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2013* 

enacted 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Office of the Secretary ........................................................................................................ $4,924 $5,086 $4,550 

Office of Tribal Relations ................................................................................................... 485 502 498 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY—Continued 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2013* 

enacted 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Coordination ............................................... 1,458 1,507 1,295 

Office of Advocacy and Outreach ....................................................................................... 1,386 1,217 1,185 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration ......................................................... 784 809 820 

Departmental Administration .............................................................................................. 23,633 22,993 20,760 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations ......................................... 3,772 3,897 3,504 

Office of Communications .................................................................................................. 8,780 8,137 7,904 

Total ....................................................................................................................... $45,222 $44,148 $40,516 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Secretary, the Committee provides an ap- propriation of $40,516,000. The Committee recommendation includes the following offices under the Office of the Secretary: Office 

of the Secretary; Office of Tribal Relations; Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Coordination; Office of Advocacy and Outreach; Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration; Departmental Administration; Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations; and Office of Communications. 

Pay Cost.—The Committee does not include requested funding 

for a civilian pay increase across the Department. Should the President provide a civilian pay increase for 2014, it is assumed that the 

cost of such a pay increase will be absorbed within existing appropriations for fiscal year 2014. 

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

report on November 15, 2013, and May 16, 2014, on planned uses 

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

Commodity Credit Corporation Act. 

Food Aid Reform.—The bill continues to fund Food for Peace 

Title II grants. There is agreement on the goals of reducing food 

insecurity around the globe and furthering the national security interests of the United States. However, there continues to be disagreement on how to achieve these goals in the most efficient and 

effective manner. The program as currently structured almost doubles the return on the taxpayer’s investment by supporting American jobs and farmers while contributing to food security abroad. At 

this time, the Committee cannot agree to the food aid reform proposal. The proposed changes could cause the program to operate 

outside of the structure, transparency, and dedicated constituencies 

provided under the Food for Peace Act. 

Notification.—Within 30 days from the enactment of this Act, the 

Secretary shall notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on the allocation of the funds provided to the Assistant 

Secretary for Congressional Relations by USDA agency, along with 

an explanation for the agency-by-agency distribution of the funds. 

Late Reports.—Reports requested by the House and Senate Appropriations Committees are an important part of the exercise of 

the Committees’ oversight mandate. The Committee is concerned 

by the Department’s consistent delinquency in completing these reports. The Committee is dismayed that 18 reports are late, due to 

excessively long reviews, especially in the Office of the Secretary. 

The Committee finds it unacceptable that some reports are almost 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
5 

a year overdue. The dates and directives specified in the House, 

Senate, or conference report are mandatory. The Committee reserves the right to call before it any agency that does not submit 

its report or reports on time. 

State Office Collocation.—The Committee continues to direct that 

any reallocation of resources related to the collocation of state offices scheduled for 2014 and subsequent years is subject to the 

Committee’s reprogramming procedures. 

Administrative Provision.—The Committee directs the Secretary 

to advise the Committees on Appropriations, through the Office of 

Budget and Program Analysis, of the status of all reports requested 

of the Department in this bill at the time of submission of the fiscal 

year 2015 budget and monthly thereafter. The Committee reminds 

the Secretary that all correspondence related to the directives in 

this bill must be addressed to the Committee on Appropriations. 

Loan and Grant Programs.—The Committee directs the Department, through the Office of Budget and Program Analysis, to provide quarterly reports to the Committees on Appropriations of the 

House of Representatives and the Senate on the status of obligations and funds availability for the loan and grant programs provided in this bill. 

The Committee further directs that if an estimate of loan activity 

for any program funded in Titles I and III of this bill indicates that 

a limitation on authority to make commitments for a fiscal year 

will be reached before the end of that fiscal year, or in any event 

whenever 75 per centum of the authority to make commitments 

has been utilized, the Secretary shall promptly notify the Committees in writing, through the Office of Budget and Program Analysis. 

Invasive Species.—The Committee recognizes the threats posed 

by invasive plant species and the need to protect, restore, and enhance native plants, including those that are endangered or threatened. The Committee encourages the Agricultural Research Service, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, and the National 

Institute of Food and Agriculture to support the research, education, and conservation of native plants. 

BioPreferred Program.—The Committee directs the Department 

to expeditiously implement changes to the program to include forest products that meet the biobased content requirements as included in the 2013 farm bill. 

Farmer-Owned Cooperatives.—The Committee recognizes USDA’s 

long track record working with farmer-owned cooperatives and encourages the Secretary to share the Deparment’s knowledge and 

best practices with other Federal agencies that have cooperative 

development programs. 

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

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


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
6 

EXECUTIVE OPERATIONS

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ECONOMIST

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $15,606,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 12,854,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 15,245,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥361,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +2,391,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Chief Economist, the Committee provides an appropriation of $15,245,000. 

Drought Resilience.—The Committee recognizes the importance 

of understanding and being prepared for drought and encourages 

the Office of the Chief Economist to continue to work with partners 

on drought-related issues. 

Policy Research.—The Committee includes $4,000,000 for policy 

research under 7 U.S.C. 3155 for entities with existing institutional 

capacity, including staff, databases, models, and long-term, welldocumented experience, to conduct complex economic and baseline 

analysis for the benefit of USDA, the Congressional Budget Office, 

and the Congress. 

NATIONAL APPEALS DIVISION

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $13,868,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 12,940,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 12,584,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥1,284,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥356,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the National Appeals Division, the Committee provides an 

appropriation of $12,584,000. 

OFFICE OF BUDGET AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $8,822,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 11,129,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 8,767,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥55,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥2,362,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of Budget and Program Analysis, the Committee 

provides an appropriation of $8,767,000. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $42,925,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 44,159,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 42,925,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥1,234,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
7 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Chief Information Officer, the Committee 

provides an appropriation of $42,925,000. 

Cybersecurity Priorities.—The Committee continues to be concerned with the shortcomings in information technology (IT) security efforts at USDA. Despite recent Congressional investments and 

progress under new OCIO leadership, USDA’s Office of Inspector 

General’s independent evaluation of USDA’s IT security program 

and practices in 2012 revealed continued material weaknesses in 

the design and effectiveness of USDA’s overall IT security program. 

The Committee directs USDA to report to the Committee no later 

than 60 days after the date of enactment on the most recent efforts 

and progress made toward securing IT data and infrastructure 

from cyber threats. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $6,090,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 6,243,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 6,090,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥153,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, the Committee provides an appropriation of $6,090,000. 

Assessments.—The Committee remains concerned that the assessments the Department charges its agencies for governmentand department-wide activities continue to escalate. Since these assessments are borne by the agencies, and Congress did not specifically provide increases to the agencies for these costs, most of the 

funding for the increase has come at the expense of programs. The 

Committee continues to direct the Office of the Chief Financial Officer to scrutinize the need for each activity, to consider its benefit 

to the mission of each agency, and to limit spending wherever possible, especially in regards to assessments for the creative media 

and broadcast center; promotional, voluntary activities; and activities not specifically authorized by Congress. 

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR CIVIL RIGHTS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $871,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 898,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 871,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥27,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

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

Committee provides an appropriation of $871,000. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
8 

OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $22,122,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 21,550,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 20,540,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥1,582,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥1,010,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of Civil Rights, the Committee provides an appropriation of $20,540,000. 

AGRICULTURE BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $239,686,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 233,095,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 64,658,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥175,028,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥168,437,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

For Agriculture Buildings and Facilities, the Committee provides 

an appropriation of $64,658,000. Section 732 requires the agencies 

to fund GSA rental payments from within the discretionary levels 

appropriated in this Act. The Committee is concerned that GSA 

rental expenses have risen by more than thirty-three percent over 

the past ten years, and without more agency attention to these 

costs, GSA rent will continue to increase. By requiring agencies to 

bear the expense of GSA rent directly, the Committee expects agencies to focus on ways to reduce these costs. 

The following table represents the Committee’s specific recommendations for this account: 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

2013 

enacted * 

2014 budget 

request 

Committee 

recommendation 

Rental Payments ..................................................................................................... $175,694 $164,270 – – – 

Department of Homeland Security 

Building Security ..................................................................................................... 13,134 14,000 $13,800 

Building Operations ................................................................................................ 50,858 54,825 50,858 

Total ........................................................................................................................ 239,686 233,095 64,658 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $3,892,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 3,600,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 3,520,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥372,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥80,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
9 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Hazardous Materials Management, the Committee provides 

an appropriation of $3,520,000. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $86,779,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 89,902,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 86,779,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥3,123,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of Inspector General, the Committee provides an 

appropriation of $86,779,000. 

Anti-Fraud Efforts.—The Committee appreciates OIG’s continued 

efforts to raise public awareness of successful Federal investigations of fraud. Such efforts are intended to deter participants from 

engaging in the misuse of taxpayer dollars and to maintain a high 

level of integrity in all of USDA’s programs. The Committee encourages OIG to expand its efforts, working with all of USDA’s 

agencies to deter fraud, waste, and abuse in the Department’s programs. 

OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $43,941,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 45,014,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 40,558,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥3,383,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥4,456,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Office of the General Counsel, the Committee provides an appropriation of $40,558,000. 

OFFICE OF ETHICS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $3,319,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 3,337,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... +18,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +3,337,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of Ethics, the Committee provides an appropriation of $3,337,000. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
10 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND

ECONOMICS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $871,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 898,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 871,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥27,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

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

and Economics, the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$871,000. 

Brown Marmorated Stink Bug.—The Committee appreciates the 

continuing work of ARS and NIFA regarding the Brown 

Marmorated Stink Bug. This pest is causing significant damage to 

agricultural crops, particularly the apple crop in the mid-Atlantic 

States, and has spread to more than 30 States and the District of 

Columbia. The Committee encourages ARS and NIFA to work collaboratively with APHIS and state partners to identify and implement appropriate controls. 

Herbicide Resistance Research.—The Committee encourages ARS 

and NIFA to address herbicide resistance through research, education, and extension. Research may include: identification of herbicide resistant weed populations, characterization of mechanisms 

of resistance, and development of innovative weed management 

strategies. The Committee encourages ARS and NIFA to work 

closely with NRCS and to incorporate, where appropriate, the conservation technical and financial assistance available to producers 

for adopting resistance management strategies. 

Lyme Disease Research.—The Committee recognizes the importance of the ongoing research efforts of ARS and NIFA regarding 

tick-borne illnesses. As the agency continues to build upon its research efforts to protect humans and livestock from tick-borne illnesses, the Committee encourages the ARS, in conjunction with 

other agencies, to maintain its efforts and consider both the human 

and economic impacts of Lyme disease on communities in the 

United States. 

ECONOMIC RESEARCH SERVICE

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $75,452,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 78,506,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 75,452,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥3,054,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Economic Research Service, the Committee provides an 

appropriation of $75,452,000. 

Local and Regional Food Production.—The Committee directs 

ERS to coordinate USDA’s agencies involved in data collection, 

analysis, and research to make available the best data related to 

the production, pricing, distribution, and marketing of locally and 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
11 

regionally produced agricultural products and to identify data gaps. 

The Committee requests that ERS provide a report that assesses 

the scope and trends in local and regional food systems and to 

make that report publically available on the agency’s website. 

NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS SERVICE

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $174,967,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 159,601,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 154,762,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥20,205,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥4,839,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the National Agricultural Statistics Service, the Committee provides an appropriation of $154,762,000, of which $42,295,000 is 

for the Census of Agriculture. 

NASS Reports.—The Committee requests NASS to report to the 

Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate on the resources required to restart surveys and reports for those commodities that do not have marketing orders or other publicly supported 

production information by March 1, 2014. 

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $1,074,163,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 1,124,003,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1,074,163,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥49,840,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Salaries and Expenses of the Agricultural Research Service, 

the Committee provides an appropriation of $1,074,163,000. 

The Committee concurs with the agency’s proposed redirection of 

ongoing research within the same location. The Committee directs 

ARS to maintain existing investments before beginning any new 

initiatives. 

Aerial Application Research.—The Committee recognizes the importance of the ARS Aerial Application Technology Program. The 

program conducts innovative research making aerial applications 

more efficient, effective, and precise. Research for aerial application 

serves the public good as a vital tool for the future, as agriculture 

strives to meet the food, fiber, and bio-energy demands of a growing population. 

Cheat Grass Eradication.—The Committee encourages ARS to 

continue research on cheat grass eradication, control, and the reduction of fuel loads, including late-season grazing techniques, and 

to work with the NRCS on this effort. 

Citrus Greening Disease Research.—The Committee commends 

ARS’s research efforts on citrus greening disease and encourages 

the agency to continue working to develop methods to reduce transmission and enhance immunity in citrus trees and to work with inVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:11 Jun 19, 2013 Jkt 081455 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR116.XXX HR116

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
12 

dustry, universities, growers, and other partners to develop effective control mechanisms. 

Classical Plant Breeding.—The Committee is aware of the need 

for classical plant breeding and encourages ARS to invest in research to improve genetic resources and cultivars for the benefit of 

U.S. producers, seed companies, processors, and consumers. This 

research should focus on breeding improved germplasm and varieties with higher yields, improved disease and pest resistance, and 

resilience to weather extremes. Additionally, methods and tools 

should be developed to enable classical breeders to choose better 

breeding parents and speed up variety development. 

Domestic and Bighorn Sheep.—The Committee recognizes the 

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

domestic sheep and wild bighorn sheep. Research has recently produced an experimental vaccine to protect bighorn populations from 

disease but much work still needs to be done in this area. The 

Committee encourages ARS to work to determine the role of domestic sheep in causing die-offs of bighorn sheep from respiratory disease and develop methods to reduce transmission and enhance immunity. 

Emerging Cereal Rust Diseases.—The Committee continues to be 

concerned about emerging cereal rust diseases, particularly Ug99, 

and the threat they pose to domestic and world food supplies. The 

Committee encourages ARS to continue its work on these diseases, 

including the development of Ug99-resistant wheat varieties. 

Food Pathogen Detection.—The Committee notes the advances in 

the detection of dangerous pathogens in the food supply and encourages ARS to continue research to increase the efficiency and 

cost-effectiveness of new technologies. 

FOV Race 4 Cotton Research.—The Committee recognizes the serious threat that fusarium oxysporum f. sp. Vasinfectum (FOV), 

particularly the strain FOV Race 4, poses to the U.S. cotton industry. The Committee encourages ARS to continue research efforts to 

combat FOV Race 4 and to work with industry and other partners 

to develop effective control measures to eradicate this disease and 

prevent its spread nationwide. 

Horticultural Research and Education.—The Committee recognizes that the U.S. National Arboretum has completed a comprehensive strategic plan. This plan emphasizes the role of the Arboretum as a center of discovery and education, as well as a destination for more than half a million visitors every year. This plan 

effectively captures the essence of the value of the Arboretum, and 

the Committee urges ARS to exercise existing authorities and provide the necessary resources to support implementation of the 

plan’s goals. The Committee requests a report on the progress toward implementation of the Arboretum’s Strategic Plan by March 

1, 2014. 

Human Nutrition Research.—The Committee remains concerned 

about the high rate of obesity in the Nation and believes that research on human nutrition to help prevent childhood obesity and 

the medical issues related to obesity are important. In addition, 

there is strong evidence that nutrition plays a vital role in how a 

person ages. The Committee encourages ARS to continue research 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
13 

relating both to childhood and adult obesity as well as the effect 

of nutrition on aging. 

Lower Mississippi River Basin.—The Committee recognizes the 

groundwater problems in the Lower Mississippi River Basin and 

encourages ARS to continue research to quantify how appropriate 

use of conservation practices and technology affect water quantity. 

National Agricultural Library.—The Committee requests that 

ARS maintain a focus on agriculture-related legal issues within the 

National Agricultural Library. The Committee recognizes agriculture-related legal issues are being litigated on an increasingly 

frequent basis, the complexity and scope of these legal issues continues to broaden, and that the National Agricultural Library plays 

an important role in assisting all stakeholders understand these 

issues. 

Natural Products Research.—The Committee recognizes the importance of developing natural products for use in agriculture in 

order to produce more toxicologically and environmentally benign 

pest management tools and to improve the nutriceutical value of 

crops. 

New England Plant, Soil, and Water Research.—The Committee 

directs ARS to report on its efforts to meet the challenges faced by 

farmers and ranchers in New England and make any recommendations to the Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate 

by March 1, 2014. 

Office of Pest Management Policy.—The Committee commends 

the Office of Pest Management Policy for its work providing the 

Department, other Federal agencies, producers, and others scientifically sound analysis of pest management issues important to agriculture, especially methyl bromide transition and pesticide resistance, and encourages the agency to continue to support this office. 

Research on Sediments.—The Committee recognizes the importance of finding solutions to the problems associated with soil erosion, including erosion and sedimentation in stream channels and 

the loss of nutrients and agricultural chemicals from farm fields. 

Wheat and Barley Scab Initiative.—The Committee expresses 

support for this initiative and directs the agency to continue research on wheat and barley scab and related issues. 

BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... $155,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. – – – 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥155,000,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For ARS Buildings and Facilities, the Committee is unable to 

provide funding for new construction due to the tight budget cap. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
14 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE

RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $720,076,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 801,140,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 718,714,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥1,362,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥82,426,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Research and Education Activities, the Committee provides 

an appropriation of $718,714,000. 

Agricultural Research Enhancement Awards.—The Committee 

continues to direct that not less than 10 percent of the competitive 

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

Aquaculture Research.—The Committee recognizes the importance of the domestic aquaculture industry and encourages NIFA 

to fund research related to genetics, disease, systems, and economics. 

Budget Request for Fiscal Year 2015.—For the fiscal year 2015 

budget request, the Committee directs the Department to include 

in the budget funding levels proposed to be allocated to and the expected publication date, scope, and allocation level for each request 

for awards to be published under (1) each priority area specified in 

section 2(b)(2) of the Competitive, Special, and Facilities Research 

Grant Act (7 U.S.C. 450i(b)(2)); (2) each research and extension 

project carried out under section 1621(a) of the Food, Agriculture, 

Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5811(a)); (3) each 

grant awarded under section 1672B(a) of the Food, Agriculture, 

Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5925b(a)); (4) each 

research, education, and extension project carried out under section 

406 of the Research Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7626); and (5) 

each research and extension project carried out under section 412 

of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act 

of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7632). The term ‘request for awards’ means a 

funding announcement published by NIFA that provides detailed 

information on funding opportunities at the Institute, including the 

purpose, eligibility, restrictions, focus areas, evaluation criteria, 

regulatory information, and instructions on how to apply for such 

opportunities. 

Grants for Insular Areas.—The Committee provides authorization for Grants for Insular Areas to be used to upgrade agriculture 

and food sciences facilities and equipment in addition to being used 

for resident instruction and distance education programs at the 

land-grant institutions in the Insular Areas. 

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

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

have a high probability of widespread implementation. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
15 

Program Consolidation and Streamlining.—The Committee accepts NIFA’s proposal to consolidate sustainable agriculture programs and pest management programs. 

Regional Research.—The Committee recognizes that State and 

regional research has a history of success in addressing critical 

pest, disease, and production problems specific to their region, and 

that these programs help producers across the Nation remain productive. 

STEM Initiatives.—The Committee recognizes the importance of 

programs to advance the education and training of minorities in 

STEM careers for the Nation’s national and economic security and 

encourages NIFA to continue to support these initiatives. 

STEM Program Effectiveness.—The Committee is concerned 

about STEM workforce development for underrepresented minorities and notes the National Academy of Science’s recommendations 

for increasing the participation and success of minority students. 

The Committee encourages the Department to emphasize STEM 

education improvement with the Historically Black Colleges and 

Universities. 

The following table reflects the amount provided by the Committee: 

RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Program/Activity Authorization 2013 

enacted 

2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Hatch Act 7 U.S.C. 361a–i ........................ $230,394 $236,334 $236,334 

McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act 16 U.S.C. 582a through a–7 ... 32,106 32,934 32,934 

Research at 1890 Institutions (Evans-Allen Program) 7 U.S.C. 3222 ........................... 49,619 50,898 50,898 

Payments to the 1994 Institutions ............................ 534(a)(1) of P.L. 103–382 ....... 3,251 3,335 3,335 

Education Grants for 1890 Institutions ..................... 7 U.S.C. 3152(b) ...................... 18,850 19,336 19,336 

Education Grants for Hispanic-Serving Institutions .. 7 U.S.C. 3241 ........................... 8,987 9,219 9,219 

Education Grants for Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions 7 U.S.C. 3156 ........................... 3,114 3,194 3,194 

Research Grants for 1994 Institutions ...................... 536 of P.L. 103–382 ................ 1,756 1,801 1,801 

Capacity Building for Non Land-Grant Colleges of 

Agriculture 

7 U.S.C. 3319i .......................... 4,387 – – – – – – 

Grants for Insular Areas ............................................. 7 U.S.C. 3222b–2, 3363 and 

3362.

1,609 1,650 1,800 

Agriculture and Food Research Initiative ................... 7 U.S.C. 450i(b) ....................... 290,468 383,376 290,657 

Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment ........................ 7 U.S.C. 3151a ......................... 4,670 4,790 4,790 

Continuing Animal Health and Disease Research 

Program 

7 U.S.C. 3195 ........................... 3,899 – – – 4,000 

Supplemental and Alternative Crops ......................... 7 U.S.C. 3319d ......................... 804 – – – – – – 

Critical Agricultural Materials Act ............................. 7 U.S.C. 178 et seq. ................ 1,054 – – – – – – 

Multicultural Scholars, Graduate Fellowship and Institution Challenge Grants 7 U.S.C. 3152(b) ...................... 8,774 – – – 9,000 

Secondary and 2-year Post-Secondary Education ...... 7 U.S.C. 3152(j) ....................... 877 – – – 900 

Aquaculture Centers ................................................... 7 U.S.C. 3322 ........................... 3,899 3,920 3,920

Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education ..... 7 U.S.C. 5811 ........................... 14,107 22,667 19,049 

Farm Business Management ...................................... 7 U.S.C. 5925f .......................... 1,414 – – – – – – 

Sun Grant Program ..................................................... 7 U.S.C. 8114 ........................... 2,437 – – – – – –

Improved Pest Control: 

Expert IPM Decision Support System ................ 7 U.S.C. 450i(c) ........................ 149 – – – – – – 

Integrated Pest Management ............................ ................................................... 2,303 – – – – – – 

Minor Crop Pest Management (IR–4) ............... ................................................... 11,614 11,913 11,913 

Pest Management Alternatives .......................... ................................................... 1,367 – – – – – – 

Total, Improved Pest Control ........................ ................................................... 15,433 11,913 11,913 

Special Research Grants: 

Global Change/UV Monitoring ........................... 7 U.S.C. 450i(c) ........................ 1,370 1,405 1,405 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
16 

RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES—Continued 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Program/Activity Authorization 2013 

enacted 

2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Potato Research ................................................. ................................................... 1,316 – – – – – – 

Forest Products Research .................................. ................................................... 1,609 – – – – – – 

Total, Special Research Grants .................... ................................................... 4,295 1,405 1,405 

Necessary Expenses of Research and Education Activities: 

Grants Management Systems ............................ ................................................... 7,633 7,830 7,830 

Federal Administration—Other Necessary Expenses for Research and Education Activities 

................................................... 6,239 6,538 6,399 

Total, Necessary Expenses ............................ ................................................... 13,872 14,368 14,229 

Total, Research and Education Activities ................................................... 720,076 801,140 718,714 

NATIVE AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS ENDOWMENT FUND

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... ($11,880,000) 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... (11,880,000) 

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

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Native American Institutions Endowment Fund, the 

Committee provides $11,880,000. 

The Committee notes that the endowment fund has a cost of 

$5,000,000 for fiscal year 2014. 

EXTENSION ACTIVITIES

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $463,896,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 459,037,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 459,011,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... –4,885,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. –26,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Extension Activities, the Committee provides an appropriation of $459,011,000. 

EFNEP and Persons with Disabilities.—The Committee recognizes the importance of agricultural education and vocational training for persons with developmental disabilities and encourages collaborations between non-profit organizations and elementary and 

secondary schools. In particular, the Committee encourages NIFA 

to use the Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program to explore opportunities to support initiatives that strive to provide agricultural education and vocational experiences by pairing schools 

with non-profit organizations dedicated to improving the lives of 

persons with disabilities. 

The following table reflects the amount provided by the Committee: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
17 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE

EXTENSION ACTIVITIES

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Program/Activity Authorization FY 2013 

enacted 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

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

Cooperative Extension 

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

208(c) of P.L. 93–471.

$286,612 $294,000 $294,000 

Extension Services at 1890 Institutions .................... 7 U.S.C. 3221 ........................... 41,522 42,592 42,592 

Extension Services at 1994 Institutions .................... 7 U.S.C. 343(b)(3) .................... 4,204 4,312 4,312 

Facility Improvements at 1890 Institutions ............... 7 U.S.C. 3222b ......................... 19,234 19,730 19,730 

Renewable Resources Extension Act .......................... 16 U.S.C. 1671 et. seq. ........... 3,607 4,060 3,700 

Rural Health and Safety Education Programs ........... 7 U.S.C. 2662(i) ....................... 1,462 – – – – – – 

Food Animal Residue Avoidance Database Program 7 U.S.C. 7642 ........................... 975 – – – 1,250 

Women and Minorities in STEM Fields ....................... 7 U.S.C. 5925 ........................... 390 – – – 400 

Grants to Youth Organizations ................................... 7 U.S.C. 7630 ........................... 711 – – – – – – 

Smith-Lever Act, Section 3(d): 

Food and Nutrition Education ........................... 7 U.S.C. 343(d) ........................ 66,227 67,934 67,934 

Pest Management .............................................. ................................................... 9,669 – – – – – – 

Farm Safety and Youth Farm Safety Education 

Programs 

................................................... 4,494 4,610 4,610 

New Technologies for Agricultural Extension .... ................................................... 1,511 1,750 1,550 

Children, Youth, and Families at Risk .............. ................................................... 7,409 8,395 7,600 

Federally Recognized Tribes Extension Program ................................................... 2,963 3,039 3,039 

Sustainable Agriculture Programs ..................... ................................................... 4,578 – – – – – – 

Total, Section 3(d) ........................................ ................................................... 96,851 85,728 84,733 

Necessary Expenses of Extension Activities: 

Agriculture in the K–12 Classroom ................... ................................................... 538 – – – 552 

Federal Administration—Other Necessary Expenses for Extension Activities ................................................... 7,790 8,615 7,742 

Total, Necessary Expenses ............................ ................................................... 8,328 8,615 8,294 

Total, Extension Activities ........................ ................................................... 463,896 459,037 459,011 

INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $20,942,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 28,129,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 31,137,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... +10,195,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +3,008,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Integrated Activities, the Committee provides an appropriation of $31,137,000. The following table reflects the amount provided by the Committee. 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE

INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program/activity Authorization FY 2013 

enacted 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Water Quality Program ......................................................... 7 U.S.C. 7626 $4,387 – – – – – – 

Regional Pest Management Centers ................................... 7 U.S.C. 7626 3,899 – – – – – – 

Methyl Bromide Transition Program .................................... 7 U.S.C. 7626 1,946 – – – $1,996 

Organic Transition Program ................................................. 7 U.S.C. 7626 3,899 $4,000 4,000 

Regional Rural Development Centers .................................. 7 U.S.C. 450i(c) 973 998 998 

Food and Agriculture Defense Initiative .............................. 7 U.S.C. 3351 5,838 5,988 7,000 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
18 

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program/activity Authorization FY 2013 

enacted 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Crop Protection/Pest Management Program ........................ 7 U.S.C. 7626 – – – 17,143 17,143 

Total, Integrated Activities ......................................... 20,942 28,129 31,137 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MARKETING AND

REGULATORY PROGRAMS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $871,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 898,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 871,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥27,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

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

$871,000. 

ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $801,198,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 797,601,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 803,538,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... +2,340,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +5,937,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Salaries 

and Expenses, the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$803,538,000. 

The following table reflects the amounts provided by the Committee: 

Committee provision 

Animal Health Technical Services ....................................................... $34,500,000 

Aquatic Animal Health ......................................................................... 2,272,000 

Avian Health .......................................................................................... 52,340,000 

Cattle Health ......................................................................................... 93,000,000 

Equine, Cervid, and Small Ruminant Health ..................................... 19,169,000 

National Veterinary Stockpile .............................................................. 2,750,000 

Swine Health .......................................................................................... 23,000,000 

Veterinary Biologics .............................................................................. 16,457,000 

Veterinary Diagnostics .......................................................................... 31,611,000 

Zoonotic Disease Management ............................................................. 9,023,000 

Subtotal, Animal Health ................................................................ 284,122,000 

Agricultural Quarantine Inspection (Appropriated) ........................... 25,298,000 

Cotton Pests ........................................................................................... 12,720,000 

Field Crop & Rangeland Ecosystem Pests ........................................... 8,877,000 

Pest Detection ........................................................................................ 27,500,000 

Plant Protection Methods Development .............................................. 20,673,000 

Specialty Crop Pests .............................................................................. 148,489,000 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
19 

Committee provision 

Tree & Wood Pests ................................................................................ 48,290,000 

Subtotal, Plant Health ................................................................... 291,847,000 

Wildlife Damage Management ............................................................. 86,104,000 

Wildlife Services Methods Development .............................................. 19,000,000 

Subtotal, Wildlife Services ............................................................. 105,104,000 

Animal & Plant Health Regulatory Enforcement ............................... 16,275,000 

Biotechnology Regulatory Services ....................................................... 18,215,000 

Subtotal, Regulatory Services ........................................................ 34,490,000 

Contingency Fund .................................................................................. – – – 

Emergency Preparedness & Response ................................................. 17,000,000 

Subtotal, Safeguarding and Emergency Preparedness ................ 17,000,000 

Agriculture Import/Export .................................................................... 14,181,000 

Overseas Technical and Trade Operations .......................................... 20,114,000 

Subtotal, Safe Trade & International Technical Assistance ....... 34,295,000 

Animal Welfare ...................................................................................... 27,087,000 

Horse Protection .................................................................................... 500,000 

Subtotal, Animal Welfare ............................................................... 27,587,000 

APHIS Information Technology Infrastructure ................................... 4,167,000 

Physical/Operational Security .............................................................. 4,926,000 

Subtotal, Agency Management ....................................................... 9,093,000 

Total, Salaries & Expenses ..................................................... 803,538,000 

Animal Welfare.—The bill funds the Animal Welfare program at 

$27,587,000, in order to ensure that minimum standards of care 

and treatment are provided for certain animals bred for commercial 

sale, used in research, transported commercially, or exhibited to 

the public. 

Brown Marmorated Stink Bug.—The Committee is aware of the 

growing threat to fruits, vegetables, other crops, and ornamentals 

throughout the mid-Atlantic region from the Brown Marmorated 

Stink Bug. It has been found in more than 30 States and the District of Columbia. The Committee directs APHIS to treat this pest 

as a priority and to continue to assist ARS, NIFA, and state partners with biological control technology once such tools are available. 

Budget Restructure.—The Committee does not support the request in the President’s fiscal year 2014 budget for APHIS to fund 

two separate accounts for Equine and Cervid Health and Sheep 

and Goat Health. 

Cervid Health.—The latest data from 2007 indicate that the 

cervid industry in the U.S. accounts for 5,600 deer farms and 1,900 

elk farms, has an economic value of $894 million, and supports 

nearly 30,000 jobs. This industry is currently adapting to a 2012 

interim final rule that established a national, voluntary herd certification program (HCP) that provides uniform herd certification 

standards and will support the domestic and international marketability of U.S. cervid herds. The Committee believes that the industry requires additional support to ensure that the newly implemented chronic wasting disease HCP is successful. Therefore, 

APHIS should spend no less than $3,000,000 for cervid health activities. Within the funds provided, APHIS should give consideration to indemnity payments if warranted. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
20 

Citrus Health Response Program (CHRP).—CHRP is a nationwide effort to protect the U.S. industry from the ravages of invasive 

pests and diseases. Funds provided for this program allow APHIS 

to partner with States and local entities to address the challenges 

of a disease-spreading vector until a cure can be developed. In addition to the funds provided in this account, the Committee encourages APHIS to utilize the funds available in the Plant Pest and 

Disease Management and Disaster Prevention account to the greatest extent possible in an attempt to sustain the economic viability 

of the citrus industry. 

APHIS Cargo Release.—The Committee recommends that USDA/ 

APHIS continue to work with the Department of Homeland Security’s Custom and Border Protection (CBP) in order to facilitate the 

release of cargo at commercial import facilities by ensuring that 

CBP inspectors and managers earn Cargo Release Authority certification for those non-reportable species and groups of organisms 

listed in the Cargo Release Plan. Such coordination will allow CBP 

officials to release cargo where CBP may find very distinctive organisms not of agricultural significance and allow APHIS entomologists, plant pathologists, and botanists to make release decisions upon discovery of those reportable organisms that may pose 

a threat to the Nation’s agricultural security. 

Cost Sharing with States and Other Cooperators.—The Committee directs APHIS to maximize the use of cost sharing agreements or matching requirements with States, Territories, producers, foreign governments, non-governmental organizations, and 

any other recipient of services in order to reduce the cost burden 

on the agency. 

Cotton Pests.—The Committee is concerned about the reappearance of the boll weevil in certain portions of the United States. The 

Boll Weevil Eradication Program has successfully eradicated the 

boll weevil from all U.S. cotton areas except for the extreme lower 

parts of Texas in the Lower Rio Grande Valley (LRGV) bordering 

Tamaulipas, Mexico. The LRGV continues an active battle to eradicate the boll weevil. The LRGV also serves as the barrier between 

Mexico and boll weevil-free areas of the United States. The Department is directed to work with the U.S. cotton industry to develop 

a plan of action to protect the United States from re-infestation 

and report its findings to the Committee not less than 120 days 

after enactment of this bill. 

Danger Pay.—The Committee recognizes the concern of those employees in areas designated by the Department of State as a Section 920 post and encourages APHIS to determine compensation of 

employees in Section 920 areas similarly. 

Designated Qualified Person Program.—The Committee directs 

APHIS to maintain transparency and consistency in the enforcement of the Horse Protection Act when dealing with the regulated 

industry. 

Emerging Plant Pests.—The Committee expects the Secretary to 

continue to use the authority provided in this bill to transfer funds 

from the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) for the arrest and 

eradication of animal and plant pests and diseases that threaten 

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

emergency outbreaks. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
21 

Feral Swine Management.—The Committee is aware of the growing economic and ecological damage caused by feral swine across 

the United States. Conservative estimates indicate feral swine are 

present in 44 States, and agricultural losses and control efforts cost 

$1.5 billion annually. The Committee understands that computer 

models have shown that lethal methods combined with contraception could significantly reduce feral swine populations over several 

years. In addition to the Committee’s support for the Department’s 

proposed increased funding for feral swine management, the Committee encourages Wildlife Services to explore development and 

field testing of non-hormonal, species-specific oral contraceptives, 

such as phaged-peptide constructs. 

Huanglongbing.—The Committee encourages APHIS to support 

its state partners through exclusion and eradication activities associated with the Asian Citrus Psyllid, the primary vector of the bacterium that causes Huanglongbing/citrus greening disease. In addition, the agency should continue to work with ARS, citrus-producing States, industry stakeholders, and universities on their research efforts to develop additional control mechanisms. 

National Poultry Improvement Plan.—The Committee supports 

the cooperative efforts of USDA, States, academia, and industry as 

part of the National Poultry Improvement Plan (NPIP). NPIP is 

internationally recognized as an independent, government poultry 

disease control program. Sufficient resources are included to staff 

the national office, administer the program, and to ensure that the 

NPIP continues its vital, successful role in protecting this important industry and source of high quality protein-rich foods for domestic and international markets. Through the program’s collaborative efforts, NPIP effectively and efficiently protects the quality, 

productivity, and economic viability of the $200 billion U.S. poultry 

industry and the nearly 900,000 jobs associated with it. 

Phytopthora ramorum.—The Committee expects APHIS to continue its efforts to manage P. ramorum while minimizing disruption to the interstate movement of plant materials and commercial 

trade. The agency should use an appropriate portion of funds from 

the Specialty Crop Pest account to expeditiously implement the review of the Federal order governing shipment of plant materials 

from quarantined and regulated counties, as well as to continue its 

review of the efficacy of the pre-notification requirements for western nurseries. APHIS should also continue efforts to partner with 

the regulated States to develop new best management practices regarding P. ramorum during the effective period of the order. 

Plant Pest and Disease Management and Disaster.—The Committee expects APHIS to obligate the $50,000,000 provided in the 

2008 farm bill (P.L. 110–234) in accordance with Congressional priorities and the criteria described under Special Funding Considerations (Section 10201(b)(6) of P.L. 110–234). USDA should prioritize the funds provided by Section 10201 for the purpose of early 

plant pest detection and surveillance in conjunction with the funds 

provided in this bill. 

Potato Cyst Nematode Eradication.—The Committee encourages 

APHIS to fund the Potato Cyst Nematode eradication program 

above the spending level in fiscal year 2013 in order to continue 

with successful efforts to eradicate this pest. If left untreated, this 

pest could spread, affecting other crops. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
22 

Wildlife Damage Management.—While receiving support from cooperators to conduct wildlife management operations, special emphasis should be placed on those areas such as oral rabies vaccination, livestock protection, predator damage management, and other 

such activities that will reduce or eliminate threats to agricultural 

industries. The Committee expects APHIS to fund national rabies 

control and surveillance efforts at the same levels expended in fiscal years 2011 and 2012. 

BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

2013 appropriation * ................................................................... $3,095,000 

2014 budget estimate ................................................................. 3,175,000 

Provided in the bill ..................................................................... – – – 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation .............................................................. ¥3,095,000 

2014 budget estimate .......................................................... ¥3,175,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

The Committee does not provide an appropriation for this account. 

AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE

MARKETING SERVICES

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $76,881,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 82,792,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 77,035,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... +154,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥5,757,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Marketing Services of the Agricultural Marketing Service, the Committee provides an appropriation of $77,035,000. 

Mandatory COOL Labeling.—The final rule dealing with mandatory Country of Origin Labeling of beef, pork, and other covered 

muscle meats sold in U.S. retail establishments is creating great 

uncertainty for U.S. meat packing, processing, and production companies as well as U.S. retail establishments. While the final rule 

became effective May 23, 2013, in order to comply with the World 

Trade Organization (WTO) findings, USDA’s final rule will not 

likely meet the full demands made by the governments of Canada 

and Mexico. By USDA’s own estimate, the range in estimated costs 

to industry of the final rule will be $53.1 million to $192.1 million 

and affect 7,181 firms and 33,350 establishments. If the final rule 

does not produce a resolution, ongoing negotiations between the 

three countries will only create increased costs and indecision in 

how the firms meet regulatory requirements. Therefore, the Committee strongly encourages USDA to delay implementation and enforcement of the final rule published on May 24, 2013, (78 Fed. 

Reg. 31367) until the WTO has completed all decisions related to 

cases WT/DS384 and WT/DS386. 

National Organic Program.—The Committee recommendation includes a one million increase above the fiscal year 2012 level for 

the National Organic Program. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
23 

Pesticide Recordkeeping Program.—The Committee concurs with 

the Administration’s proposal to eliminate funding for the Pesticide 

Recordkeeping Program (PRP) and recommends that the States 

and territories operating under the Federal recordkeeping regulations transition to a program such as those operating in 23 States 

and one Territory with their own compliance review programs 

under federally-recognized state pesticide recordkeeping requirements. As noted in the Administration’s fiscal year 2013 proposal, 

‘‘this program is not central to the core mission of AMS, which is 

to facilitate the competitive and efficient marketing of agricultural 

products.’’ The termination of the PRP will result in a savings of 

$1.8 million as proposed in the budget. 

Program Levels.—The Committee recommendation includes funding at the President’s request level for Marketing News and Surveillance and Standardization Programs. 

Seafood in Nutrition Programs.—USDA’s Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans 2010 recommends increased intake of seafood, especially 

those products with high levels of omega-3 fatty acids. Due in large 

part to USDA’s own regulations, canned tuna is currently prohibited from purchase by the Department for inclusion in school nutrition programs. The Committee directs USDA to report to the Committees on Appropriations within 60 days of enactment on potential 

ways that would allow a revision of the Master Solicitation for 

Commodity Procurement to allow for the purchase of canned tuna. 

The report should address the requirement that all tuna be landed 

by U.S.-flag fishing vessels; the option for less than 100 percent of 

the value of the tuna product be United States produced; and the 

requirement that all tuna products are canned in the United 

States, its territories, possessions, Puerto Rico, or the Trust Territories of the Pacific Islands. 

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

2013 limitation * ................................................................................. ($62,592,000) 

2014 budget limitation ....................................................................... (60,435,000) 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. (60,435,000) 

Comparison: 

2013 limitation ............................................................................ ¥2,157,000 

2014 budget limitation ................................................................ – – – 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

The Committee provides a limitation of $60,435,000 on Administrative Expenses of the Agricultural Marketing Service. 

FUNDS FOR STRENGTHENING MARKETS, INCOME, AND SUPPLY

(SECTION 32)

MARKETING AGREEMENT AND ORDERS

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2013 appropriation ............................................................................. ($20,056,000) 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... (20,181,000) 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. (20,181,000) 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... +125,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
24 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Marketing Agreements and Orders Program, the Committee provides a transfer from section 32 funds of $20,181,000. 

Information Technology Support.—The amount provided in this 

account includes an increase of $6,818,000 for the information technology upgrades of the Web-Based Supply Chain Management system that allows AMS, the Farm Service Agency (FSA), the Foreign 

Agricultural Service (FAS), and the U.S. Agency for International 

Development to purchase U.S. commodities. 

The following table reflects the status of this fund for fiscal years 

2013 and 2014: 

ESTIMATED TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE AND BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD FISCAL YEARS 2013–2014 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2013 

estimate 

FY 2014 budget 

estimate 

Appropriation (30% of Customs Receipts) ............................................................................. $8,990,117 $9,211,183 

Less Transfers: 

Food and Nutrition Service ............................................................................................. ¥7,697,031 ¥7,815,038 

Commerce Department ................................................................................................... ¥131,372 ¥130,144 

Total, Transfers ...................................................................................................... ¥7,828,402 ¥7,945,183 

Prior Year Appropriation Available, Start of the Year ............................................................ 219,286 117,000 

Prior Year Collections and Recoveries .................................................................................... 0 0 

Unavailable for Obligations (recoveries & offsetting collections) .......................................... 0 0 

Transfer of Prior Year Funds to FNS (Fruit & Vegetable) ....................................................... ¥133,000 ¥117,000 

Budget Authority ............................................................................................................. 1,248,000 1,266,000 

Rescission of Current Year Funds ........................................................................................... ¥109,608 ¥206,000 

Appropriations Reduced by 5.1 Percent due to Sequestration ............................................... ¥40,392 0 

Appropriations Reduced by 7.2 Percent due to Sequestration ............................................... 0 ¥80,000 

Unavailable for Obligations (Fruit & Vegetable transfer to FNS) .......................................... ¥117,000 ¥119,000 

Available for Obligation .................................................................................................. 981,000 861,000 

Less Obligations: 

Child Nutrition Programs (Entitlement Commodities) ................................................... 465,000 465,000 

State Option Contract ..................................................................................................... 5,000 5,000 

Removal of Defective Commodities ................................................................................ 2,500 2,500 

Emergency Surplus Removal .......................................................................................... 106,400 0 

Small Business Support ................................................................................................. 0 0 

Disaster Relief ................................................................................................................ 5,000 5,000 

Additional Fruits, Vegetables, and Nuts Purchases ...................................................... 206,000 206,000 

Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program ............................................................................... 41,000 40,000 

Estimated Future Needs ................................................................................................. 102,313 82,697 

Total, Commodity Procurement .............................................................................. 933,213 806,197 

Administrative Funds: 

Commodity Purchase Support ............................................................................... 27,731 34,622 

Marketing Agreements and Orders ........................................................................ 20,056 20,181 

Total, Administrative Funds .............................................................................. 47,787 54,803 

Total Obligations ............................................................................................................ 981,000 861,000 

Unobligated Balance, End of Year .......................................................................................... 0 0 

Unavailable for Obligations (Fruit and Vegetable transfer to FNS) ....................................... 117,000 119,000 

Balances, Collections and Recoveries Not Available .............................................................. 0 0 

Total End of Year Balances .................................................................................. 117,000 119,000 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
25 

PAYMENTS TO STATES AND POSSESSIONS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $1,298,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 1,363,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1,171,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥127,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥192,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Payments to States and Possessions, the Committee provides 

an appropriation of $1,171,000. 

GRAIN INSPECTION, PACKERS AND STOCKYARDS ADMINISTRATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $39,249,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 40,531,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 39,249,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥1,282,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration, the Committee provides $39,249,000. 

Program Levels.—The Committee recommendation includes funding at the requested level for the Grain Regulatory Program and 

funding at the fiscal year 2012 level for the Packers and Stockyards Program. 

LIMITATION ON INSPECTION AND WEIGHING SERVICES EXPENSES

2013 limitation .................................................................................... ($50,000,000) 

2014 budget limitation ....................................................................... (50,000,000) 

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

Comparison: 

2013 limitation ............................................................................ – – – 

2014 budget limitation ................................................................ – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

The Committee includes a limitation on inspection and weighing services expenses of $50,000,000. The bill includes authority to exceed by 10 percent the limitation on inspection and weighing services with notification to the Committees on Appropriations. 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR FOOD SAFETY

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $791,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 816,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 791,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥25,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety, the Committee provides an appropriation of $791,000. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
26 

FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $1,029,879,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 1,008,473,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 998,762,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥31,117,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥9,711,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Food Safety and Inspection Service, the Committee provides an appropriation of $998,762,000. 

The Committee notes that FSIS has had $2,300,000 in its base 

budget since 2009 to fund the Cooperative Interstate Program, and 

that the budget request includes a $2,434,000 increase for a total 

of $4,734,000. Four states have applied to the program, and three 

have been accepted. While the Committee supports CIP, the proposal to add 20 states by the end of 2014 at an additional cost of 

$2,434,000 is not included in the recommendation. 

The following table reflects the Committee’s recommendations for 

fiscal year 2014: 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Committee 

provision 

Federal inspection ................................................................................................... $881,855 

Public health data communication infrastructure system .................................. 34,580 

International food safety and inspection .............................................................. 15,841 

State food safety and inspection ............................................................................ 62,734 

Codex alimentarius ................................................................................................. 3,752 

Total, Food Safety and Inspection Service .................................................... 998,762 

Humane Methods of Slaughter.—FSIS shall ensure that inspectors hired with funding previously specified for Humane Methods 

of Slaughter Act enforcement focus their attention on overseeing 

compliance with humane handling rules for live animals as they 

arrive and are offloaded and handled in pens, chutes, and stunning 

areas, and that they receive robust national training, including on 

the Regulatory Essentials, Humane Animal Tracking System, and 

Public Health Information System. 

Buffalo/Bison Inspection.—The Committee urges FSIS to enhance its efforts to work with Tribes to set up voluntary, fee-forservice programs for the slaughter of Tribally-raised buffalo and 

bison. In doing so, FSIS should work with the Tribal Council and 

make the Council aware of such opportunities as mobile slaughter 

and trade associations such as the North American Meat Association and the American Association of Meat Processors which may 

be able to assist them in qualifying for inspection and starting operations. 

Regulations.—The Committee supports implementation of section 

11016 of Public Law 110–246 and expects USDA to meet its statutory obligation and promulgate regulations to implement this section using the broad definition contained in its proposed rule. 

Reducing Foodborne Illnesses.—The Committee notes that the 

current poultry slaughter inspection system has been in place since 

1957. On January 27, 2012, USDA proposed a science-based rule 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
27 

that would begin to replace this outdated approach, and replace it 

with one that is based on pathogen reduction and control. USDA 

inspectors would monitor establishment process controls in removing diseased birds, ensure compliance with Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point plans and Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures, conduct ante mortem inspection, and collect samples for 

pathogen testing. On-line inspectors will still conduct carcass-bycarcass inspection to ensure that diseased carcasses are condemned 

by establishment workers according to regulatory requirements. 

The Committee believes that implementation of this system, that 

has been tested over ten years, will lead to a reduction of pathogens in poultry and a corresponding reduction in foodborne illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths. The Committee urges the Department to finalize this rule. 

FARM ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR FARM AND FOREIGN

AGRICULTURAL SERVICES

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $871,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 898,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 871,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥27,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services, the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$871,000. 

The Committee is concerned about waste, fraud, and abuse in 

programs administered by FSA and the Risk Management Agency 

(RMA). Therefore, the Secretary is directed to certify that any 

newly approved payment, loan, grant, subsidy, or insurance claim 

from a program administered by FSA or RMA does not include individuals or entities that have been permanently debarred from 

participating in USDA programs. 

FARM SERVICE AGENCY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriation Transfer from program 

accounts Total, FSA S&E 

2013 appropriation * .......................................................... $1,177,926,000 ($300,393,000) ($1,478,319,000) 

2014 budget estimate ........................................................ 1,176,460,000 (309,980,000) (1,486,440,000) 

Provided in the bill ............................................................. 1,177,926,000 (300,393,000) (1,478,319,000) 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation – – – – – – – – – 

2014 budget estimate +1,466,000 (¥9,587,000) (¥8,121,000) 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
28 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Salaries and Expenses of Farm Service Agency, the Committee provides an appropriation of $1,177,926,000 and transfers of 

$300,393,000 for a total program level of $1,478,319,000. 

STATE MEDIATION GRANTS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $4,259,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 3,782,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 4,259,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +477,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For State Mediation Grants, the Committee provides an appropriation of $4,259,000. 

GRASSROOTS SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PROGRAM

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $5,362,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 4,552,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥810,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +4,552,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Grassroots Source Water Protection Program, the Committee provides an appropriation of $4,552,000. 

DAIRY INDEMNITY PROGRAM

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

2013 appropriation ............................................................................. 1 $100,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 1 250,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1 250,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... +150,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 1 Current indefinite appropriation. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Dairy Indemnity Program, the Committee provides an 

appropriation of such sums as may be necessary (estimated to be 

$250,000 in the President’s fiscal year 2014 budget request). 

AGRICULTURAL CREDIT INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

ESTIMATED LOAN LEVELS

2013 loan level * .................................................................................. $4,821,748,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 5,555,344,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 5,381,267,000 

Comparison: 

2013 loan level ............................................................................. +559,519,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥174,077,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
29 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund program account, the 

Committee provides a loan level of $5,381,267,000. 

The following table reflects the loan levels for the Agricultural 

Credit Insurance Fund program account: 

AGRICULTURE CREDIT PROGRAMS—LOAN LEVELS 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2013 

level 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provisions 

Farm loan programs 

Farm ownership: 

Direct ............................................................................................... $475,000 $575,000 $575,000

Unsubsidized Guaranteed ............................................................... 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 

Farm operating: 

Direct ............................................................................................... 1,050,090 1,223,686 1,131,752 

Unsubsidized guaranteed ............................................................... 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,426,311 

Emergency loans ...................................................................................... 34,658 34,658 26,204 

Indian tribe land acquisition loans ......................................................... 2,000 2,000 2,000 

Conservation loans: 

Unsubsidized Guaranteed ............................................................... 150,000 150,000 150,000 

Indian highly fractionated land ............................................................... 10,000 10,000 10,000 

Boll weevil eradication ............................................................................ 100,000 60,000 60,000 

Total ................................................................................................ 4,821,748 5,555,344 5,381,267 

ESTIMATED LOAN SUBSIDY AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LEVELS 

Direct loan 

subsidy 

Guaranteed 

loan 

subsidy 

Administrative 

expenses 

2013 appropriation * .................................................................................. $78,107,000 $17,401,000 $305,034,000 

2014 budget estimate ................................................................................ 73,252,000 18,300,000 314,918,000 

Provided in the bill ..................................................................................... 67,800,000 17,401,000 305,034,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ¥10,307,000 – – – – – – 

2014 budget estimate ¥5,452,000 ¥899,000 ¥9,884,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

The following table reflects the costs of loan programs under 

credit reform: 

AGRICULTURE CREDIT PROGRAMS—SUBSIDIES AND GRANTS 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2013 * 

enacted 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provisions 

Farm loan subsidies: 

Farm ownership: 

Direct ............................................................................................... $19,634 $4,428 $4,428 

Farm operating: 

Direct ............................................................................................... 57,020 67,058 62,020 

Unsubsidized Guaranteed ............................................................... 17,401 18,300 17,401 

Emergency loans ...................................................................................... 1,284 1,698 1,284 

Indian highly fractionated land ............................................................... 169 68 68 

Total, Farm loan subsidies ............................................................. 95,508 91,552 85,201 

Individual development accounts ................................................... – – – – – – – – – 

Total ................................................................................................ 95,508 91,552 85,201 

ACIF expenses: 

Salaries and expenses ............................................................................. 297,313 306,998 297,313 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
30 

AGRICULTURE CREDIT PROGRAMS—SUBSIDIES AND GRANTS—Continued 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2013 * 

enacted 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provisions 

Administrative expenses .......................................................................... 7,721 7,920 7,721 

Total, ACIF expenses ....................................................................... 305,034 314,918 305,034 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

RISK MANAGEMENT AGENCY

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $73,018,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 71,496,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 71,496,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥1,522,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Risk Management Agency, the Committee provides an 

appropriation of $71,496,000. 

Enhancements to Existing Crop Insurance Programs.—The Committee believes that crop insurance has been an invaluable resource for agricultural producers in times of disaster. At the same 

time, it has protected taxpayers from costly and unbudgeted disaster assistance bills. The Committee supports the ongoing efforts 

of the House and Senate Committees on Agriculture to reauthorize 

provisions of the Farm Bill that maintain and strengthen the existing crop insurance program. 

Organic Foods.—The Committee is aware of the legislative mandate in the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 that an organic price election be offered on all organic crops by 2012 (7 

U.S.C. 1522(c)(10)(C)(iii)). The Committee appreciates the recent 

announcement by the Department regarding a new organic price 

election for the 2014 insurance year. The Committee is concerned, 

however, at the pace of progress and requests a report from the Department within 60 days of enactment detailing its strategic plan 

and timetable to implement organic price elections for all organic 

crops produced in compliance with the National Organic Program 

regulations under the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (7 

U.S.C. 6501 et seq.). 

Timely Communication of Changes in Coverage.—Crop insurance 

represents a key risk management tool for agricultural producers 

around the country and any changes to their insurance policies can 

have an immediate impact on critical financial and business decisions. The Committee understands that RMA will implement 

changes in an effort to reduce the loss ratios in the crop insurance 

industry, but it is concerned by the timeliness and the manner in 

which RMA notifies purchasers of changes to crop insurance coverage. The Committee is aware of issues pertaining to the late notification of changes communicated to producers and insurance providers over the past year that may have resulted in negative consequences for both. The Committee expects that RMA will address 

this issue and ensure effective and efficient administration of the 

crop insurance program. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
31 

CORPORATIONS 

FEDERAL CROP INSURANCE CORPORATION FUND

2013 appropriation ............................................................................. 1 $9,517,433,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 1 9,502,944,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1 9,502,944,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥14,489,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 1 Current indefinite appropriation. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund, the Committee provides an appropriation of such sums as may be necessary 

(estimated to be $9,502,944,000 in the President’s fiscal year 2014 

budget request). 

COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION FUND

REIMBURSEMENT FOR NET REALIZED LOSSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS) 1

2013 appropriation ............................................................................. $11,018,509,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 12,539,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 12,539,000,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... +1,520,491,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 1 Current indefinite appropriation. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Reimbursement for Net Realized Losses to the Commodity 

Credit Corporation, the Committee provides such sums as may be 

necessary to reimburse for net realized losses sustained but not 

previously reimbursed (estimated to be $12,539,000,000 in the 

President’s fiscal year 2014 budget request). 

HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT

(LIMITATION ON EXPENSES)

2013 limitation .................................................................................... ($5,000,000) 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... (5,000,000) 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. (5,000,000) 

Comparison: 

2013 limitation ............................................................................ – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For CCC Hazardous Waste Management, the Committee provides a limitation of $5,000,000. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
32 

TITLE II 

CONSERVATION PROGRAMS 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR NATURAL RESOURCES AND

ENVIRONMENT

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $871,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 898,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 871,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥27,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and 

Environment, the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$871,000. 

NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE

CONSERVATION OPERATIONS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $810,115,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 807,937,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 810,115,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +2,178,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Conservation Operations, the Committee provides an appropriation of $810,115,000. 

The Committee provides $9,066,000 for the Snow Survey and 

Water Forecasting Program; $9,164,000 for the Plant Materials 

Centers; and $77,990,000 for the Soil Surveys Program. The Committee provides $713,895,000 for conservation technical assistance 

and directs NRCS to maintain level funding for the Conservation 

Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) and the Conservation Delivery 

Streamlining Initiative (CDSI). The Committee is pleased with the 

results of CEAP and the agency’s efforts to modernize the delivery 

of conservation programs and services through CDSI and encourages the continuation of these efforts. 

Cheat Grass Eradication.—The Committee encourages NRCS to 

continue to assist farmers and ranchers to eradicate, control, and 

reduce the fuel loads associated with cheat grass and to work with 

the ARS on its research related to cheat grass. 

Herbicide Resistance.—The Committee directs NRCS to ensure 

agency staff, partners, and producers are aware of new and interim 

conservation practice standards and conservation activity plans to 

address herbicide-resistant weeds, and that financial assistance 

through certain conservation programs is available to assist producers in their efforts to control these weeds. The Committee also 

directs NRCS to report to it on this effort by December 1, 2013. 

Farmland Protection Program.—The Committee is aware of concerns regarding oil and gas exploration and extraction on current 

and potential Farmland Protection Program easements and reVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:11 Jun 19, 2013 Jkt 081455 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR116.XXX HR116

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
33 

quests NRCS provide a report on its regulations and practices regarding the program and these issues by September 30, 2013. 

Fleet Management.—The Committee is aware NRCS recently 

completed a fleet management pilot program for the purpose of reducing costs and better utilizing its vehicle fleet to meet the agency’s goals and mandates. The Committee encourages NRCS and 

USDA to use this data and other available fleet management tools 

to reduce the number of non-essential vehicles purchased and/or 

leased. 

National Marine Sanctuaries.—The Committee urges the agency 

to continue the collaborative agreement with the Office of National 

Marine Sanctuaries to address agricultural sources of runoff, such 

as sediments, nitrates, and pesticides. 

Sage Grouse Initiative.—The Committee supports NRCS’s sage 

grouse conservation efforts. Through the initiative, NRCS provides 

technical and financial assistance to help landowners conserve sage 

grouse habitat on their land. The initiative is an integral part of 

efforts by Federal agencies, several western States, and private 

landowners to help preclude the listing of the sage grouse as an endangered species. 

WATERSHED REHABILITATION PROGRAM

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $14,331,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 12,000,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥2,331,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +12,000,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Watershed Rehabilitation Program, the Committee pro- vides an appropriation of $12,000,000. 

TITLE III 

RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $871,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 898,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 871,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥27,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development, the 

Committee provides an appropriation of $871,000. 

Program Consolidation.—The Committee does not concur with 

the budget proposal to consolidate Rural Development’s business 

and economic development programs into the Rural Business and 

Cooperative Grants Program. 

Program Efficiency.—The Committee appreciates the proposal included in the budget request for the Rural Housing Service to improve its eligibility verification processes through the use of dataVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:11 Jun 19, 2013 Jkt 081455 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR116.XXX HR116

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
34 

sharing with the Department of Health and Human Services and 

pledges to work with the authorizing Committee to enact the proposal. 

Regional Innovation Initiative.—The fiscal year 2014 budget request proposes a Regional Innovation Initiative similar to the proposal included in the fiscal year 2013 request. The Committee is 

unable to provide any funding or authorization for the initiative as 

requests for additional information on the specific need, purpose, 

and plans for the initiative continue to go unanswered. 

Reporting Requirements.—The Committee reminds Rural Development that any action that relocates an office or employees and 

reorganizes offices, programs, or activities must be reported to the 

Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate as required 

by law. 

Strike Force Initiative.—The Committee supports Rural Development’s continued efforts to address the issue of persistent poverty 

in rural communities through the Strike Force Initiative and requests a report to be provided to the House and Senate Committees 

on Appropriations on the results of the initiative, including a comparison of its effectiveness to other Rural Development programs, 

within 60 days of enactment of this Act. 

RURAL DEVELOPMENT SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

FY 2013 * 

level 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provisions 

Appropriations ........................................................................... $201,659,000 $204,695,000 $201,659,000

Transfer from: 

Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account ........... 400,308,000 417,692,000 400,308,000 

Rural Development Loan Fund Program Account ............ 4,326,000 4,467,000 4,326,000 

Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loan Program Account .............................................................. 33,601,000 34,694,000 33,601,000 

Total, RD Salaries and Expenses ........................... 639,894,000 661,548,000 639,894,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Salaries and Expenses of the Rural Development mission 

area, the Committee provides an appropriation of $201,659,000. 

RURAL HOUSING SERVICE

RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Loan level Subsidy level Administrative expenses 

2013 appropriation * .................................. $25,147,198,000 $74,295,000 $400,308,000 

2014 budget estimate ................................ 24,574,712,000 18,624,000 417,692,000 

Provided in the bill ..................................... 25,060,103,000 36,066,000 400,308,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ¥87,095,000 ¥38,229,000 – – – 

2014 budget estimate +485,391,000 +17,442,000 ¥17,384,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
35 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Housing Insurance Fund program account, the 

Committee provides a loan level of $25,060,103,000. 

The following table reflects the loan levels for the Rural Housing 

Insurance Fund program account: 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2013 

level 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provisions 

Rural Housing Insurance Fund Loans: 

Single family housing (sec 502): 

Direct ............................................................................................... $900,000 $360,000 $820,221

Unsubsidized guaranteed ............................................................... 24,000,000 24,000,000 24,000,000 

Housing repair (sec 504) ......................................................................... 27,952 26,280 25,362 

Rental housing (sec 515) ........................................................................ 31,277 28,432 28,432 

Multi-family guaranteed (sec 538) ......................................................... 150,000 150,000 150,000 

Credit sales of acquired property ............................................................ 10,000 10,000 10,000 

Self-help housing land development fund .............................................. 5,000 – – – 5,000 

Farm labor housing ................................................................................. 22,969 – – – 21,088 

Total, Loan authorization ................................................................ 25,147,198 24,574,712 25,060,103 

The following table reflects the costs of loan programs under 

credit reform: 

ESTIMATED LOAN SUBSIDY AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LEVELS 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2013 

level 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account (loan subsidies and 

grants): 

Single family housing (sec 502): 

Direct ............................................................................................... $52,380 $9,792 $22,310 

Housing repair (sec 504) ......................................................................... 3,725 2,176 2,100 

Rental housing (sec 515) ........................................................................ 10,724 6,656 6,656 

Farm labor housing ................................................................................. 7,466 – – – 5,000 

Total, Loan subsidies ............................................................................... 74,295 18,624 36,066 

Farm labor housing grants ...................................................................... 8,645 13,992 8,168 

RHIF expenses: 

Administrative expenses ................................................................. 400,308 417,692 400,308 

RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $884,332,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 1,015,050,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1,012,050,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... +127,718,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥3,000,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rental Assistance Program, the Committee provides a 

program level of $1,012,050,000. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
36 

MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVITALIZATION PROGRAM ACCOUNT

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $27,084,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 32,575,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 27,084,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥5,491,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

For the Multifamily Housing Revitalization Program Account, 

the Committee provides an appropriation of $27,084,000, including 

$9,749,000 for the rural housing voucher program. 

MUTUAL AND SELF-HELP HOUSING GRANTS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $29,246,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 10,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 17,131,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥12,115,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +7,131,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Mutual and Self-Help Housing Grants, the Committee pro- vides an appropriation of $17,131,000. 

RURAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANTS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $32,303,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 25,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 18,585,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥13,718,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥6,415,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Housing Assistance Grants program, the Committee provides an appropriation of $18,585,000. 

RURAL COMMUNITY FACILITIES PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $31,495,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 17,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 25,251,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥6,244,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +8,251,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Community Facilities Program Account, the Com- mittee provides an appropriation of $25,251,000. 

The following table provides the Committee’s recommendations: 

(Dollars in Thousands) 

FY 2013 * 

level 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provisions 

Loan levels: 

Community facility direct loans ................................ ($2,200,000) ($1,500,000) ($2,200,000) 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
37 

(Dollars in Thousands) 

FY 2013 * 

level 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provisions 

Community facility guaranteed loans ....................... (57,481) (– – –) (47,319) 

Subsidy and grants: 

Community facility direct loans ................................ – – – – – – – – – 

Community facility guaranteed loans ....................... 3,782 – – – 3,000 

Community facility grants ......................................... 12,673 13,000 13,000 

Rural Community Development Initiative .................. 5,967 – – – 5,967 

Economic Impact Initiative ........................................ 5,789 – – – – – – 

Tribal college grants .................................................. 3,284 4,000 3,284 

Total, Rural Community Facilities Program 

subsidy and grants ...................................... 31,495 17,000 25,251 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

The following is included in bill language for the Rural Community Facilities Program: $5,967,000 is for the Rural Community Development Initiative. 

RURAL BUSINESS-COOPERATIVE SERVICE

RURAL BUSINESS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $83,745,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 51,777,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 71,777,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥11,968,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +20,000,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Business Program Account, the Committee provides an appropriation of $71,777,000. 

The following table provides the Committee’s recommendations 

as compared to the budget request: 

(Dollars in Thousands) 

FY 2013 

level 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provision 

Loan level: 

Business and industry guaranteed loans ................. ($821,224) ($740,700) ($740,730) 

Subsidy and grants: 

Business and industry guaranteed loans ................. 54,920 51,777 51,777 

Rural business enterprise grants .............................. 23,707 – – – 20,000 

Rural business opportunity grants ............................ 2,193 – – – – – – 

Delta regional authority ............................................. 2,925 – – – – – – 

Total, Rural Business Program subsidy and 

grants ........................................................... 83,745 51,777 71,777 

The following programs are included in bill language for the 

Rural Business Program account: $500,000 for rural transportation 

technical assistance; and $3,900,000 for Federally Recognized Native American Tribes, of which $244,000 is for transportation technical assistance. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
38 

RURAL DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Loan 

level 

Subsidy 

level 

Administrative 

expenses 

2013 appropriation * .......................................................... $18,414,000 $5,900,000 $4,326,000 

2014 budget estimate ........................................................ 18,889,000 4,082,000 4,467,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................. 18,889,000 4,082,000 4,326,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation .................................................... 475,000 ¥1,818,000 – – – 

2014 budget estimate ............................................... – – – – – – ¥141,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Development Loan Fund program account, the 

Committee provides for a loan level of $18,889,000. 

For the loan subsidy, the Committee provides an appropriation 

of $4,082,000. 

In addition, the Committee provides $4,326,000 for administrative expenses. 

RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

Loan level 

2013 appropriation ................................................................................ $33,077,000 

2014 budget estimate ............................................................................ 33,077,000 

Provided in the bill ................................................................................ 33,077,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ......................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate ..................................................................... – – – 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Economic Development Loans Program Account, 

the Committee provides for a loan level of $33,077,000. 

RURAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $27,009,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 17,250,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 17,250,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥9,759,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. – – – 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Rural Cooperative Development Grants, the Committee provides an appropriation of $17,250,000. 

The total includes $2,250,000 for a cooperative agreement for the 

Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas program and 

$15,000,000 for the value-added agricultural product market development grant program. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
39 

RURAL ENERGY FOR AMERICA PROGRAM

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $3,315,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 19,740,000 

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

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥315,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥16,740,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Energy for America Program, the Committee pro- vides a loan level of $14,161,000 and an appropriation of 

$3,000,000 for the loan subsidy to make loans as authorized by section 9007 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 

(7 U.S.C. 8107). 

RURAL UTILITIES SERVICE

RURAL WATER AND WASTE DISPOSAL PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $511,288,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 304,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 447,997,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥63,291,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +143,997,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account, the 

Committee provides an appropriation of $447,997,000. 

Guaranteed Loans.—The Committee expresses its support for 

water and waste disposal guaranteed loans and encourages RUS to 

utilize existing balances in the program during fiscal year 2014. 

Water Supplies for Very Small Communities.—The Committee is 

aware of concerns that RUS grant programs do not adequately help 

small, disadvantaged and severely disadvantaged communities access the funding and expertise necessary to develop sustainable 

water supplies or otherwise improve their water systems. The Committee requests the agency provide a report to the Committees on 

Appropriations of the House and Senate by March 1, 2014, on its 

programs, regulations, outreach efforts, and other assistance provided to disadvantaged and severely disadvantaged communities. 

The report should include information on these communities and 

indicators of their historical access to predevelopment planning 

grants by State and recommendations for changes, including ways 

to better target predevelopment grant funding to severely disadvantaged communities. 

The following table provides the Committee’s recommendations: 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2013 

level 

FY 2014 

level 

Committee 

provisions 

Loan levels: 

Water and waste direct loans ......................................... ($1,000,000) ($1,200,000) ($1,200,000) 

Water and waste guaranteed loans ................................ (61,321) – – – – – – 

Direct Loans authorized by P.L. 83–566 ......................... (40,000) – – – – – – 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
40 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2013 

level 

FY 2014 

level 

Committee 

provisions 

Subsidy and Grants: 

Direct Subsidy .................................................................. 78,672 – – – – – – 

Guaranteed Subsidy ......................................................... 634 – – – – – – 

Water and Waste Revolving Fund ................................... 975 – – – 500 

Water Well System Grants ............................................... 968 – – – 968 

Grants for the Colonias and AK/HI .................................. 64,829 – – – 64,829 

Water and Waste Technical Assistance Grants .............. 18,523 – – – 18,523 

Circuit Rider Program ...................................................... 14,623 – – – 14,623 

Solid Waste Management Grants .................................... 3,315 4,000 3,315 

High Energy Cost Grants ................................................. 9,749 – – – – – – 

Water and Waste Disposal Grants .................................. 319,000 300,000 345,239 

Total Subsidies and Grants .................................... $511,288 $304,000 $447,997 

RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS LOANS PROGRAM

ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Loan 

level 

Subsidy level Administrative 

expenses 

2013 appropriation * .......................................................... $7,790,000,000 – – – $33,601,000 

2014 budget estimate ........................................................ 4,690,000,000 – – – 34,694,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................. 5,190,000,000 – – – 33,601,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ¥2,600,000,000 – – – – – – 

2014 budget estimate +500,000,000 – – – ¥1,093,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program Account, the Committee provides a loan level of 

$5,190,000,000. In addition, the Committee provides $33,601,000 

for administrative expenses. 

The Committee does not concur with the proposal to limit the use 

of rural electrification loans and instead expects USDA to work 

with borrowers to finance the most reliable and cost-effective electricity source that meets their needs. 

The following table reflects the loan levels for the Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program account: 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

FY 2013 

enacted 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provisions 

Loan authorizations: 

Electric: 

Direct, 5% .................................................................. $100,000 – – – – – – 

Direct, FFB ................................................................. 6,500,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 

Guaranteed underwriting ........................................... 500,000 – – – 500,000 

Subtotal ...................................................................... 7,100,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 

Telecommunications: 

Direct, Treasury rate .................................................. 690,000 690,000 690,000 

Subtotal ...................................................................... 690,000 690,000 690,000 

Total, Loan authorizations ................................ 7,790,000 4,690,000 5,190,000 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
41 

DISTANCE LEARNING, TELEMEDICINE, AND BROADBAND PROGRAM

FY 2013 * 

enacted 

FY 2014 

estimate 

Committee 

provisions 

Broadband Program: 

Loan authorization ..................................................... $42,239,000 $63,356,000 $42,146,000 

Loan subsidy .............................................................. 3,899,000 8,268,000 5,500,000 

Grants ........................................................................ 10,111,000 10,372,000 10,111,000 

Distance learning and telemedicine: 

Grants ........................................................................ 24,323,000 24,950,000 24,323,00 

Total, Loan subsidy and grants ....................... 38,333,000 43,590,000 39,934,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Pro- gram, the Committee provides an appropriation of $39,934,000, 

which includes $24,323,000 for distance learning and telemedicine 

grants. 

Broadband Loan Program Priorities.—Funding provided for the 

broadband program is intended to promote broadband availability 

in those areas where there is not otherwise a business case for private investment in a broadband network. The Committee directs 

RUS to focus expenditures on projects that bring broadband service 

to currently unserved households. 

TITLE IV 

DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR FOOD, NUTRITION, AND

CONSUMER SERVICES

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $791,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 816,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 791,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥25,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and 

Consumer Services, the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$791,000. 

The Committee directs FNS to continue making all policy documents related to the WIC program (including, but not limited to, 

instructions, memoranda, guidance, and questions and answers) 

available to the public on the Internet within one week of their release to state WIC administrators. 

The Committee is concerned about duplicative and overlapping 

food assistance programs, with the Government Accountability Office (GAO) having cited 18 different domestic programs that show 

signs of overlap and inefficient use of resources. The Committee 

urges FNS to review eligibility requirements and eliminate duplication to ensure families are receiving adequate but not overlapping 

assistance. 

The Committee expects USDA to issue guidelines to the appropriate state agencies on a requirement to include the USDA InspecVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:11 Jun 19, 2013 Jkt 081455 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR116.XXX HR116

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
42 

tor General (IG) Fraud Hotline and the IG website address on all 

SNAP and WIC Electronic Benefit Transfer cards and WIC coupons/vouchers or on any other information that accompanies the 

WIC instruments for the purpose of reporting potential fraud, 

waste, and abuse by vendors and/or participants. The Committee 

directs USDA to issue these guidelines no later than July 1, 2013. 

As part of USDA’s effort to reduce fraud, ensure the integrity of 

its nutrition programs, and safeguard the identities of participants 

in nutrition assistance programs, the Committee directs the Secretary to provide a report detailing the prevalence of identity theft 

incidents perpetrated against USDA nutrition program beneficiaries; steps USDA is taking to protect program beneficiaries’ 

personally identifiable information against unauthorized disclosure; 

and what, if any, actions are being taken to educate participants 

on the threat of identity theft. 

FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE

CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2013 appropriation ............................................................................. $19,891,185,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 20,487,229,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 20,452,229,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... +561,044,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥35,000,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Child Nutrition Programs, the Committee provides $20,452,229,000. The fiscal year 2013 conference report provided 

$9.7 million for school meals equipment grants, and the fiscal year 

2014 budget requests $35 million for this program. The Committee 

is aware of the importance of these funds, especially in rural areas, 

and will continue to monitor the need for this program. 

School Meals.—The Committee is concerned about the challenges 

and costs that local schools face in implementing the school meals 

final rule. While schools are still working to implement these nutrition standards for lunch, they also must begin implementing these 

standards for breakfast in the 2013–14 school year. In addition, 

USDA recently proposed more regulations on schools. Before USDA 

can begin implementing the requirements for the School Breakfast 

Program and the proposed rule on nutrition standards for all foods 

sold in school, USDA is directed to receive notification from each 

local school participating in the program that it can implement the 

final rule on nutrition standards in a workable and cost-neutral 

manner. While the Committee appreciates the flexibility USDA has 

provided to schools regarding the grain and protein requirements 

for school year 2013–2014, schools will still need certainty into the 

future. USDA is encouraged to extend this flexibility and provide 

schools with a long-term policy by September 1, 2013, to assist 

them with planning and procurement for future school years. As 

schools seek to implement the new school meal standards, the 

Committee encourages USDA to consider ways to assist schools 

with technical assistance and training to provide healthful, cost-effective foods that students will eat. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
43 

Improper Payments.—The Committee continues to be concerned 

about the staggering improper payment rates in the National 

School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School Breakfast Program 

(SBP). For fiscal year 2012, the NSLP had an error rate of 15.53 

percent, which is $1.6 billion in improper payments. The SBP had 

an error rate of 25.18 percent, or an estimated $825 million. These 

programs have some of the highest error and improper payment 

rates of all Federal programs. The Committee provides funding to 

support USDA’s efforts to reduce erroneous payments and expects 

USDA to utilize any additional funds necessary from the State Administrative Expenses account to assist States and Local Educational Agencies in reducing errors. 

Prioritization of Monitoring and Compliance Reviews.—The Committee directs the Secretary to allow States to vary the frequency 

of monitoring and compliance reviews of each school food authority 

based on past school performance, with no cycle extending more 

than five years as granted in the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act 

of 2010. 

Child and Adult Care Food Program.—The Committee directs 

USDA to verify that CACFP sites, which provide at-risk, afterschool snacks and suppers, are in full compliance with the eligibility requirements for participating in the program. 

Summer Food Service Pilot Program.—Distressed counties in certain parts of the country face high levels of food insecurity. The 

Committee supports the efforts that authorize the Secretary to conduct demonstrations to test new models of preventing food insecurity and hunger among children during the summer months. The 

Committee directs the Secretary to provide a report no later than 

60 days after enactment on the estimated implementation costs 

and benefits of the models that have been tested and provide recommendations for cost effective ways to promote food security in 

counties as defined in 40 U.S.C. 14102. 

The following table reflects the Committee recommendations for 

the child nutrition programs: 

(Dollars in thousands) 

Child Nutrition Programs: 

School lunch program ............................................................................ $11,647,505 

School breakfast program ..................................................................... 3,842,895 

Child and adult care food program ...................................................... 3,052,176 

Summer food service program .............................................................. 467,932 

Special milk program ............................................................................ 10,778 

State administrative expenses .............................................................. 247,544 

Commodity procurement ....................................................................... 1,103,244 

Food safety education ............................................................................ 2,649 

Coordinated review ................................................................................ 10,000 

Computer support and processing ........................................................ 11,002 

CACFP training and technical assistance ........................................... 8,016 

CN Studies ............................................................................................. 19,697 

CN Payment Accuracy ........................................................................... 9,617 

Farm to School Team ............................................................................ 2,170 

Team Nutrition ...................................................................................... 15,004 

Healthier US School Challenge ............................................................ 2,000 

Total ................................................................................................. 20,452,229 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
44 

SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $6,868,934,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 7,141,625,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 6,654,871,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥214,063,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥486,754,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), the Committee provides an appropriation of $6,654,871,000. 

The President’s budget request includes a projection of an average monthly participation rate of 8.9 million women, infants, and 

children in fiscal year 2014. It is worth noting that previous projections for the average monthly WIC participation rates have been 

inflated. For example, the President’s budget request in fiscal year 

2012 projected an average monthly participation rate of 9.6 million 

people, when in fact the average participation rate was 8.9 million. 

In fiscal year 2013, the request projected participation rates of 9.1 

million, and to date, participation has been well below this estimate, averaging 8.7 million participants per month. Birth rates are 

an important factor in estimating WIC participation, and the number of births has steadily declined since 2007, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Food costs also have been 

lower than expected. The Committee supports USDA’s efforts to 

promote cost containment and expects some measures being implemented by States to result in lower food costs over the long term. 

The Committee also notes USDA has full authority to utilize 

carry over funds from the previous fiscal year and encourages 

USDA to work with States on a regular and timely basis to determine the availability of recovery funds as early as possible. Furthermore, the Secretary has $125 million in the WIC contingency 

reserve fund as a safety net to meet unexpected demand. 

The Committee provides for continuation of the breastfeeding 

peer counselor program, infrastructure, and investments in management information systems within the total amount provided in 

the bill, pending a determination by the Secretary that funds are 

available to meet caseload demand. 

The Committee will continue to monitor WIC food costs, participation, and carryover funds and take additional action as necessary 

to ensure that funding provided in fiscal year 2014 is sufficient to 

serve all eligible applicants. 

Income Eligibility Standards.—The Committee remains concerned that USDA’s regulations regarding income eligibility determinations and corresponding allowable practices, including the 

definitions of income and household, use of programs acceptable for 

adjunctive or automatic eligibility, and income verification procedures, have created wide disparity among the States, Territories, 

and Tribal Organizations. Concerns such as these were identified 

in the February 2013 GAO report, ‘‘WIC Program: Improved Oversight of Income Eligibility Determination Needed.’’ In partial response to the report, USDA issued income eligibility guidance to all 

state agencies on April 26, 2013. The Committee directs USDA to 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
45 

provide a report within 90 days of enactment detailing the training, 

technical assistance, and compliance monitoring activities that 

USDA will undertake in connection with the release of these guidelines. 

Cost Management within WIC State Agencies.—The Committee 

supports USDA’s efforts to rein in the cost of WIC food items while 

ensuring the nutritional value and food choices for participants. As 

state agencies consider options for cost containment, the Committee directs FNS to closely monitor this process to ensure there 

are no unintended consequences for participants, vendors, or product manufacturers. The Committee is aware that USDA is conducting management evaluations of all state agencies since more 

States have had problems with vendor management and food cost 

containment. As demonstrated in USDA’s oversight of States with 

violations, USDA has the ability to require state agencies to reduce 

the maximum dollar amount the state agency reimburses for WIC 

food items. The Committee directs the Department to provide quarterly updates to the Committee on the management evaluation 

process, including concerns that have arisen and steps USDA has 

taken to correct any violations. In addition, the Committee is 

aware that USDA issued moratoriums that prohibit the authorization of new WIC vendors in some States. While the Department 

should be applauded for efforts to control costs and address fraud, 

waste and abuse, both WIC participants and the vendors who serve 

participants may be negatively impacted by an indefinite moratorium. The Committee directs USDA to submit a report within 60 

days of enactment on the actions States need to take to address 

Agency concerns, along with a timeline, for lifting these moratoriums. 

Vendors Offering Incentive Items to WIC Participants.—The practice of some vendors offering incentive items for purchases of WICauthorized food items may increase the cost of WIC foods. Incentives may draw WIC participants who would otherwise shop at less 

expensive WIC-authorized stores. In addition, the price of WIC food 

items may be increased to cover the cost of incentives. The Committee encourages the Secretary to use existing authority to limit 

incentives on WIC transactions to help ensure that incentives do 

not increase WIC food costs and encourages the Secretary to provide recommendations for legislative changes that could help ensure that incentives do not increase WIC food costs. 

Childhood Screening.—The Committee recognizes the important 

connection between childhood lead poisoning and nutrition status. 

The Committee encourages WIC to partner with stakeholders in an 

effort to establish point-of-care blood lead screening activities for 

children who utilize WIC services in underserved communities 

where childhood lead poisoning rates are high. 

Eligible Foods.—The Committee encourages the Secretary to 

amend 7 CFR 246.10 in order for state agencies to include all varieties of fresh, whole or cut vegetables, except for vegetables with 

added sugars, fats, oils; provided that inclusion of such vegetables 

contribute towards meeting the special nutritional needs of program participants and increases the availability of low-cost, highnutrient alternatives for participants throughout the year. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
46 

SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

2013 appropriation ............................................................................. $77,290,160,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 78,389,610,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 76,332,112,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥958,048,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥2,057,498,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Committee provides $76,332,112,000. The total amount includes 

$3,000,000,000 for a contingency reserve to be used only in the 

amount necessary. 

Fraud, Waste, and Abuse.—The Committee is aware of recent 

USDA efforts to strengthen the integrity of SNAP by establishing 

Federal-State data-sharing agreements to reduce fraud. However, 

the Committee recognizes more can be done to target fraud and has 

previously directed and expects USDA to permanently debar retailers and participants from the program if found guilty of fraud and 

abuse. To further assist in this effort, the Committee directs USDA 

to consider all options, including requiring that retailers participating in SNAP maintain a unique business identification, in order 

to identify any relationship between a disqualified SNAP retailer 

and all eligible SNAP participants to effectively screen applicants 

for criminal activity, fraud, Federal debarment, and questionable 

business practices. 

Employment and Training.—The Committee directs the Secretary to provide a report within 90 days of enactment on how the 

SNAP Employment and Training (E&T) program is currently being 

used to help SNAP participants gain skills and training to find productive employment that will allow them to transition from SNAP 

to self-sufficiency, including measurable results of the program. 

The Committee also encourages the Secretary to provide a five-year 

plan for how the E&T program, as well as any other resources and 

programs, will be used to help participants find employment. 

Recruitment Activities.—The Committee is concerned about the 

use of valuable tax dollars to promote enrollment of SNAP through 

radio, television, and other means of advertisements. The Committee is also concerned by outreach activities with foreign governments to encourage use of SNAP. The Committee strongly encourages USDA to cease these types of government-sponsored recruitment activities. 

Prepared Foods/Beverages Purchased with SNAP Benefits.—The 

Committee is concerned that SNAP vendors are allowed to sell prepared food or drink with SNAP benefits beyond those allowances 

for the homeless, elderly, or disabled. The Committee directs USDA 

to tighten restrictions on SNAP eligibility for hot prepared foods 

and extend restrictions to other foods intended for immediate onpremise consumption such as hot prepared beverages and fountain 

drinks. 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.—The Committee is aware of the interest in transitioning the Commonwealth 

of the Northern Mariana Islands into SNAP. The Committee directs the Secretary to provide a report on the feasibility of establishing SNAP in the Northern Mariana Islands, including the capaVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:11 Jun 19, 2013 Jkt 081455 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR116.XXX HR116

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
47 

bilities of the Commonwealth to fulfill the responsibilities of a state 

agency by ensuring participation of only eligible households, maintaining program integrity, paying a share of administrative costs 

with non-federal funds, and other such requirements as deemed 

necessary by the Secretary to operate SNAP. 

The Emergency Food Assistance Program.—The Committee urges 

USDA to assess the availability of and consider policies and procedures that would make it easier for food banks and pantries to 

serve populations that may have dietary restrictions due to religious dietary laws. 

The following table reflects the Committee recommendations for 

the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: 

[Dollars in Thousands] 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Account: 

Benefits * ................................................................................................ $66,541,196 

Contingency Reserve ............................................................................. 3,000,000 

Administrative Costs: 

State Administrative Costs ................................................................... 3,999,024 

Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention Grant Program ........... 350,000 

Employment and Training .................................................................... 437,405 

Mandatory Other Program Costs ......................................................... 161,744 

Discretionary Other Program Costs ..................................................... 998 

Administrative Subtotal ................................................................. 4,949,171 

Nutrition Assistance for Puerto Rico (NAP) * ..................................... 2,000,568 

American Samoa * .................................................................................. 8,034 

Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations ........................... 104,000 

TEFAP Commodities ............................................................................. 268,500 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands .............................. 12,148 

Community Food Project ....................................................................... 5,000 

Program Access ...................................................................................... 5,000 

Subtotal ........................................................................................... 2,403,250 

ARRA Benefits ....................................................................................... ¥561,505 

Total ................................................................................................. 76,332,112 

* Totals include ARRA benefits: $452,585,000 for core SNAP; $108,485,000 for Nutrition Assistance for Puerto Rico; and, $435,000 for American Samoa. 

COMMODITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $247,570,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 271,701,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 265,892,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... +18,322,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥5,809,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

The Committee provides an appropriation of $265,892,000 for the 

Commodity Assistance Program. The recommended funding level 

for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program is $202,682,000, 

the same as the President’s budget request. 

The Committee recommendation includes $16,548,000 for the 

Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program. 

The Committee has included $45,592,000 for administrative 

funding for the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP). 

For the Food Donations Programs, the Committee provides an 

appropriation of $1,070,000 for Pacific Island Assistance. 

TEFAP Handling and Distribution Costs.—In addition to the 

grant funds to support commodity handling and distribution costs, 

the bill permits States to use up to 10 percent of the funds proVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:11 Jun 19, 2013 Jkt 081455 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR116.XXX HR116

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
48 

vided for purchasing TEFAP commodities to help with the costs of 

storing, transporting, and distributing commodities. The Committee expects state agencies to consult with their emergency feeding organizations on the need for the conversion of such funds. 

NUTRITION PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $139,899,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 146,592,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 139,899,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥6,693,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For Nutrition Programs Administration, the Committee provides $139,899,000. 

The Committee does not provide funding for the Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion to develop federal dietary guidance for 

infants and children from birth to 24 months of age or to promote 

the Dietary Guidelines for Americans or MyPlate. The nutrition 

education services provided through WIC, along with other Federal 

nutrition education programs, are available to assist with the dietary and nutritional needs of infants and children. The Committee 

also notes that USDA does significant advertising of the Dietary 

Guidelines, MyPlate, and other resources to promote healthier lifestyles. These efforts are combined with the ‘‘Let’s Move!’’ campaign 

and use of this information by the public and private sectors. 

TITLE V 

FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS 

FOREIGN AGRICULTURAL SERVICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriation Transfer from export loan Total 

2013 appropriation * ................................................................ $172,346,000 $6,290,000 $178,636,000 

2014 budget estimate .............................................................. 178,826,000 6,394,000 185,220,000 

Provided in the bill ................................................................... 172,866,000 6,290,000 179,156,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation +520,000 – – – +520,000 

2014 budget estimate ¥5,960,000 ¥104,000 ¥6,064,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Foreign Agricultural Service, the Committee provides an 

appropriation of $172,866,000 and transfers of $6,290,000. 

The Committee directs the Secretary, through the Office of Budget and Program Analysis, in consultation with the Administrator of 

the U.S. Agency for International Development, to submit quarterly reports to the Committee on the status of the Bill Emerson 

Humanitarian Trust, as well as to immediately notify the Committee when the Trust has been drawn down. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
49 

Food for Progress.—The Committee supports the work of the 

Food for Progress program, which increases rural incomes and enhances food security by improving agricultural productivity, supporting agribusiness development, and expanding the availability 

of financial services. The Committee encourages USDA to consider 

the work of non-governmental organizations that are involved in 

small-scale agricultural biomass projects when issuing awards in 

the program. These types of projects may offer numerous benefits, 

from the production of biomass crops to the processing and marketing of crop and animal products. 

Performance Goals and Outcome Based Measures.—In April 

2013, USDA’s Office of Inspector General released a report on FAS 

performance and said that FAS’ performance measures were not 

outcome-based and do not show how the United States is performing in certain markets compared to its competitors. The Agency’s overall agricultural trade strategy, Country Strategy Statements, and USDA’s Global Market Strategy need to incorporate 

measurable goals and outcome-based measures so that USDA can 

gauge the effectiveness of the investment of appropriated resources. 

The Committee directs FAS to report no later than December 1, 

2013, to the Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate on how the Agency is developing outcome-based measures that 

demonstrate results, and, if applicable, how FAS is changing the 

allocation of resources to promote increased foreign consumption of 

U.S. agricultural goods. 

FOOD FOR PEACE TITLE I DIRECT CREDIT AND FOOD FOR PROGRESS

PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $2,735,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 2,628,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 2,735,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +107,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the administrative expenses to carry out the credit program 

of Food for Peace Title I, Food for Peace Act, and the Food for 

Progress Act, the Committee provides an appropriation of 

$2,735,000. 

FOOD FOR PEACE TITLE II GRANTS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $1,433,565,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... – – – 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 1,149,680,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥283,885,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. +1,149,680,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

For Food for Peace Title II grants, the Committee provides $1,149,680,000. 

Food Aid Reform.—The Committee is concerned about the effect 

of the Administration’s proposed reforms on food aid programs. The 

Committee directs USDA to work with USAID to facilitate an indeVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:11 Jun 19, 2013 Jkt 081455 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR116.XXX HR116

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
50 

pendent third party study and submit a report to the Committees 

on Appropriations within 60 days of enactment on (1) how the Administration would find the greatest possible efficiencies in programs under existing law and regulation while seeking to feed 

more people without increased levels of funding; and, (2) alternatively, explain in detail how the Administration’s proposed reform to PL 480, Title II would be implemented within the existing 

statutory and regulatory framework. The study should address: efforts to combat the causes of hunger and malnutrition in target 

populations; efforts to address specific nutritional needs of the recipient community; resiliency efforts to reduce the need for emergency and developmental food assistance; assurance that reforms 

do not shift funding away from other existing USDA and/or USAID 

programs; actions that would need to be taken to address the recommendations in GAO report 11–636; and, ways agencies can better coordinate efforts to maximize results. 

COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION EXPORT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $6,635,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 6,748,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 6,635,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... – – – 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥113,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For administrative expenses of the Commodity Credit Corporation Export Loans Program Account, the Committee provides an 

appropriation of $6,635,000. 

MCGOVERN-DOLE INTERNATIONAL FOOD FOR EDUCATION AND CHILD

NUTRITION PROGRAM GRANTS

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $183,816,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 185,126,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 180,320,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥3,496,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥4,806,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child 

Nutrition Program Grants, as authorized by Section 3107 of P.L. 

107–171 (7 U.S.C. 1736o–1), the Committee provides an appropriation of $180,320,000. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
51 

TITLE VI 

RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG 

ADMINISTRATION 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

(SALARIES AND EXPENSES)

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Appropriation User fees Total, FDA S&E 

2013 appropriation * .......................................................... $2,461,051 $1,698,804 $4,159,855 

2014 budget estimate ........................................................ 2,548,905 1,794,765 4,343,670 

Provided in the bill ............................................................. 2,485,399 1,794,765 4,280,164 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation +24,348 +95,961 +120,309 

2014 budget estimate ¥63,506 – – – ¥63,506 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

The Committee provides an appropriation of $2,485,399,000 in 

new budget authority for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 

In addition, the Committee recommends the following user fee 

amounts: $760,000,000—prescription drugs; $114,833,000—medical 

devices; $23,600,000—animal drugs; $7,328,000—animal generic 

drugs; $534,000,000—tobacco products; $12,925,000—food and feed 

recalls; $15,367,000—food reinspection; $305,996,000—human generic drugs; and, $20,716,000—biosimilars. The combination of new 

budget authority and user fees provides FDA with a total discretionary salaries and expenses level of $4,280,164,000. This total 

does not include permanent, indefinite user fees for mammography, 

export, and color certification of $31,765,000. 

The Committee recommendation includes $63,896,000 for White 

Oak Consolidation and $9,748,700 for inspections in China. The 

Committee includes an additional $26,747,000 for food safety activities and an additional $2,524,000 for medical product safety activities. 

The Committee assumes that the pending animal drug and animal generic drug user fee reauthorizations will occur. 

The Committee recommendation does not include proposed user 

fees for food facility registration, food import, medical products reinspection, international courier, cosmetics, or food contact notification. 

The Committee includes an increase of $1,004,000 above the fiscal year 2013 funding level and not less than $10,312,000 of FDA 

headquarters funding for medical countermeasures initiative. 

The Committee does not include requested funding for a civilian 

pay increase across the agency. Should the President provide a civilian pay increase for 2014, it is assumed that the cost of such a 

pay increase will be absorbed within existing appropriations for fiscal year 2014. The Committee does include, however, $1,125,000 

for the Commissioned Corps pay increase. 

The Committee notes that funding for the National Antimicrobial 

Response Monitoring System is estimated at $7,800,000 in fiscal 

years 2013 and 2014 and urges FDA to consider providing additional funding for this program if warranted. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
52 

The Committee directs FDA to maintain the fiscal year 2012 

funding level for the Food Contact Notification program. 

Spending Plans.—Within 30 days of enactment, the Commissioner shall notify the Committees on Appropriations of both 

Houses of Congress on the allocation of the funds provided herein, 

by account, and within each account by program, project, and activity. 

FDA User Fee Collections/Obligations.—The Committee is concerned about the large unobligated balances that continue to occur 

in FDA’s user fee programs. While Congress did allow for some exemptions from fiscal year limitations and for some amounts to be 

carried forward into subsequent fiscal years, it could not have been 

anticipated that FDA would be carrying in excess of $1,000,000,000 

in unobligated user fees halfway into any fiscal year. In the Tobacco user fee program alone, the fiscal year 2012 unobligated balance that carried over into fiscal year 2013 was $600,000,000. 

While FDA estimates this figure will drop to $250,000,000 by the 

end of fiscal year 2013, the Committee remains skeptical that this 

will occur. The Committee directs that not later than November 1, 

2013, and each month thereafter through the months covered by 

this Appropriations Act, the Commissioner to submit to the Committees on Appropriations of the House and the Senate a report on 

user fees collected for each user fee program included in the bill. 

The report shall also include monthly obligations incurred against 

such fee collections. The first report shall include a distinct categorization of the user fee balances that are being carried forward 

into fiscal year 2014 for each user fee account as well as a detailed 

explanation of what accounts for the balance and what the balance 

will be used for. 

Transparency Concerns.—The Committee is concerned about the 

unpredictable nature and pace at which FDA moves guidance, 

rules, and regulations through the process. The Agency must understand that FDA is often viewed as a primary source of information for consumer decisions that impact their health and wellbeing. The Committee understands that many rules and regulations get through the agency and the department only to languish 

at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). On the other 

hand, FDA has discretion to issue advisories and guidance without 

the need for OMB clearance. In a number of critical health areas, 

American consumers and industry are faced with no guidance at all 

or inconsistent messages on many important issues. The following 

is a list of examples: seafood advisory for pregnant women; sunscreen ingredients; new dietary ingredients for dietary supplements; and, Bisphenol A. The Committee directs FDA to report to 

the Committees on Appropriations by September 1, 2013, on how 

the agency plans to develop new methods of communicating with 

its stakeholders on future actions affecting critical policy issues, including estimated timeframes for when regulations, advisories, and 

guidance are planned for release and what decision points are necessary before these policy documents can be made. 

Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTD).—The Committee has become 

aware that Chagas disease is not on the list of neglected diseases 

as currently defined by FDA. The Committee urges FDA to make 

the necessary modifications to include Chagas disease in its list of 

neglected diseases in line with World Health Organization’s list of 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
53 

NTDs. Additionally, the Committee directs that FDA build stronger 

partnerships with global regulatory stakeholders and strengthen 

its internal capacity to review products for neglected diseases. 

Guidance for Industry.—The Committee directs the Secretary of 

Health and Human Services to finalize Guidance for Industry (GFI) 

#213 prior to January 1, 2014. The Committee directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to publish a report not later 

than one year following the date of finalization of GFI #213 that 

(1) lists the following, for each medically important antimicrobial 

new animal drug administered in feed or water to food-producing 

animals with one or more approved production claims (including 

any growth promotion, feed efficiency, or weight gain claims) and/ 

or that are approved for over-the-counter (OTC) marketing, provided that such antimicrobial is in a class of drugs that FDA determines accounts for 10 percent or more of all physician prescriptions: (a) the drug’s new animal drug application (NADA) number(s), (b) sponsor, (c) all antimicrobial active ingredients contained 

in the drug, and, (d) all production claims approved for the drug; 

and (2) specifies the number of sponsors of the new animal drugs 

listed that have notified the FDA of their intent to participate in 

the voluntary process described in GFI #213. The Committee further directs the Secretary, beginning not later than one year following the finalization of GFI #213, to publish annual reports that 

(1) specify the number of antimicrobial new animal drugs for which 

sponsors have submitted applications under GFI #213 to change 

existing approvals, broken out by type of change sought (i.e., removal of production claims; addition of treatment, control, and/or 

prevention claims; and removal of OTC marketing status); and (2) 

list the applications submitted under GFI #213 that have been approved by the agency by NADA number, and if not approved or rejected, indicate whether the inaction was a result of insufficient 

FDA resources, insufficient information from sponsors or some 

other reason. 

Nutrition Labeling.—The Committee remains concerned with 

FDA’s proposed rule to regulate Nutrition Labeling of Standard 

Menu Items at Chain Restaurants. The Committee urges FDA to 

use the proposed alternative Option 2 definition of the rule which 

only applies to restaurants or retail establishments where the primary and majority of business is the selling of food for consumption 

or the selling of food that is processed or prepared on the premises. 

The Committee believes the agency should take into account the 

increased costs and logistical challenges chain restaurants will face 

in meeting the requirements of the proposed rule. To meet the requirements of the law, FDA should consider a clear, conspicuous 

statement of required nutritional information on a prominently displayed poster adjacent to the menu board and nutritional information to be provided in pamphlet form prominently displayed next 

to drive-through menu boards as meeting such requirements. 

Food safety monitoring.—The Committee notes that the National 

Agriculture and Food Defense Strategy Plan is being finalized as 

required by Section 108 of Public Law 111–353. As research needs 

are identified to carry out this section, the Committee encourages 

FDA to consider funding research that would provide portable and 

technologically advanced testing platforms needed to effectively 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
54 

monitor and protect against intentional adulteration of the food 

supply. 

Regulations.—The Committee appreciates FDA’s acknowledgement that exclusive tobacco products may raise different questions 

of public health and may need to be treated differently. Further, 

the Committee notes that there are key differentiating and unique 

characteristics of premium cigars and that any effort to bring these 

products under the ‘‘deeming’’ rule should proceed with these factors being taken into consideration. 

Sunscreen.—Approximately two million cases of skin cancer are 

diagnosed each year and an estimated one in five Americans may 

develop skin cancer during their lifetime. Since sunscreen use can 

help prevent this disease, the Committee is concerned that FDA 

has taken no final action to approve new sunscreen ingredients 

under the Time and Extent Applications (TEA) process. The Committee understands that new sunscreen ingredient TEAs have been 

pending at FDA for more than 10 years without any approvals despite their widespread safe and effective use in other countries. 

FDA has listed final action on sunscreen ingredient applications in 

its Unified Agenda every year since 2008; however, no such action 

has ever been taken. Therefore, FDA shall take final action on all 

sunscreen ingredient applications currently pending by June 1, 

2014, and shall work with Congress and stakeholders—including 

ingredient manufacturers, finished product manufacturers, dermatologists, cancer prevention organizations and others—to develop a new process that will allow safe and effective sunscreen ingredient market applications to receive a final decision from FDA 

within one year of application date. 

New dietary ingredients.—The Committee notes that FDA has 

not addressed issues relating to its July 2011 draft guidance on 

New Dietary Ingredients (NDI) for Dietary Supplements despite 

this Committee’s urging it to do so last year. The Committee continues to be concerned that this guidance is being utilized by FDA 

for enforcement activities despite the document only being draft 

guidance. The Committee directs FDA to report back within 60 

days of enactment of this Act with a timeline on how it intends to 

re-engage the dietary supplement community to develop a final 

guidance on what constitutes a NDI. 

Food Safety Centers of Excellence.—The funding provided for 

CFSAN supports the base funding for the CFSAN Centers of Excellence at the FY 2011 level, including Food Safety Modernization 

Act collaborative efforts with these Centers. The Committee encourages FDA to maintain an appropriate funding level for both 

Food Safety Modernization Act related and other food safety related activities performed by these Centers of Excellence. 

Cosmetics.—The Committee directs the Office of Cosmetics and 

Colors to respond by September 30, 2013, to a citizen petition setting safety levels for trace amounts of lead in cosmetics. 

Food and Drug Safety and Innovation Act.—The Committee is 

aware that shortages of critical drugs persist following the enactment of the Food and Drug Safety and Innovation Act. Surveys 

conducted by the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists, the 

American Hospital Association, and the American Society of 

Health-System Pharmacists report persistent shortages of drugs 

used in anesthesia care, oncology, and other services, owing priVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:11 Jun 19, 2013 Jkt 081455 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR116.XXX HR116

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
55 

marily to problems in manufacturing, which impair patient access 

to care and patient experiences in the healthcare system, delay surgical procedures, and possibly increase overall healthcare costs. 

The Committee directs the Commissioner to continue to prioritize 

the public reporting of manufacturing shortages and to work with 

industry to prevent conditions that might lead to drug shortages. 

Food and Veterinary Medicine.—The Committee is aware of the 

important support provided to FDA’s food and veterinary medicine 

programs and through its research and program relations with 

their centers of excellence. The Committee encourages FDA to 

maintain an appropriate funding level for both Food Safety Modernization Act related activities and the base work performed by 

these centers. 

Compounded Drugs.—The Committee is concerned by the quantity and volume of recalls of compounded sterile products and 

therapies. The Committee awaits the results of a study by GAO 

providing updated information on state and Federal oversight of 

compounding. Furthermore, the Committee encourages FDA and 

the States to work together to improve and strengthen oversight 

and enforcement of compounding pharmacies. 

Food Product Tracing.—Pursuant to Section 204 of the Food 

Safety Modernization Act, FDA initiated pilot projects for improving product tracing along the food supply system and the establishment of recordkeeping requirements for high-risk foods. These pilots were conducted by the Institute of Food Technologists, in consultation with various industry sectors, USDA, state agencies, and 

consumer groups. A report on these projects was published on 

March 4, 2013, and that report affirmed that industry and government continue to pursue traceability goals on separate tracks and 

with little collaboration. The Committee directs the Commissioner, 

in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, to create a 

science-based, international food traceability initiative through a 

collaborative public-private partnership model. Furthermore, the 

Committee directs the Commissioner to provide a report within 180 

days of enactment of this Act detailing the structure, goals, and implementation status of such traceability initiative. 

Center for Tobacco Products Performance.—The Committee understands that GAO is conducting a study of FDA’s premarket review of tobacco products. The Committee directs that, upon publication of that study, FDA shall use it to identify a set of regulatory 

performance standards that will address pending and new substantial equivalent applications, pending and new modified risk applications, citizen petitions, and meeting requests. The Committee 

further directs FDA to report to the Committees on Appropriations 

by March 31, 2014, on the implementation of such performance 

standards. 

Low-Risk, Expedited Imports.—The current fiscal environment 

and the growing number of import entries require that efforts to 

enhance safety must be directed towards the most serious compliance infractions. The Committee strongly encourages FDA to establish a pilot project to expedite imports for importers with strong 

safety records. Such project could be modeled on the Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism and Importer Self-Assessment programs which address security of imported products. The goal would be new trade facilitaVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:11 Jun 19, 2013 Jkt 081455 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR116.XXX HR116

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
56 

tion methods for low-risk importers that provide accurate and reliable data, have a history of importing compliant products, and low 

risk cargo that could be incorporated into the import inspection 

process, thereby enabling FDA to better leverage financial resources. FDA is strongly encouraged to provide clear guidelines for 

those importers that are low-risk and to collaborate with CBP and 

other relevant agencies to enhance information sharing between 

agencies on this work. FDA is directed to provide a report to the 

Committee on its efforts in this regard by December 1, 2013. 

Cough and Cold Products for Children.—The Committee is concerned that FDA has not issued a proposed rule revising the monograph regulating the labeling of over-the-counter cough and cold 

products for children. The Committee directs the agency to publish 

a proposed rule by December 31, 2013, based on scientific evidence 

for safety and efficacy in pediatric populations and taking into consideration the October 19, 2007, joint recommendations of its Pediatric Advisory Committee and Nonprescription Drugs Advisory 

Committee. 

Data Collection.—To assist efforts intended to address antibiotic 

use, the Committee directs the Secretaries of Health and Human 

Services and Agriculture to require appropriate agencies to collaborate to (1) identify approaches for collecting detailed data on antibiotic use in food-producing animals, (2) seek stakeholder and 

broad public input to develop a proposal for collecting this information, and (3) use the data to assess the effectiveness of policies to 

curb antibiotic resistance. The Committee further directs FDA to 

ensure that ARS continues to analyze, characterize, and report on 

data collected through NARMS. 

Seafood Advisory.—FDA must publish a final seafood advisory in 

conjunction with all applicable parties as directed in House Report 

112–101 and Senate Report 112–73. The advisory must be consistent with USDA’s dietary guidelines and be completed and available to the public by June 30, 2013. 

User Fees.—The Committee is concerned about subjecting FDA 

user fees to sequestration as these fees are not normal tax revenue. 

It is important to maintain the integrity and industry support for 

user fee programs. The Committee encourages FDA to reevaluate 

its calculations of sequestration in regard to user fees. 

Statutory Deadlines.—The Committee is aware the Administration continues to miss statutory deadlines for rulemaking to implement Public Law 111–353. The Committee expects the Administration to meet the statutory timelines for implementing Public Law 

111–353 and directs FDA to provide a report every 180 days detailing the reasons and justification for any proposed rule or final regulation being 120 days or more beyond its statutory deadline. 

Mammography Quality.—The Committee urges FDA to follow up 

the November 2011 meeting of the National Mammography Quality 

Assurance Advisory Committee by promptly reviewing the evidence 

supporting including information related to an individual’s breast 

density in the mammogram patient report and physician report. 

Canned Tuna.—The Committee directs FDA to revise the standard of identity for canned tuna to adopt the drained weight fill of 

container standard as requested in the 1994 ‘‘Citizens Petition to 

Amend Canned Tuna Standard of Identity, 21 CFR 161.190, Docket 

No. FDA–2011–P–0763.’’ According to the Congressional Research 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
57 

Service, the United States is the only country that uses the pressed 

cake weight fill of container standard that requires outdated 1950s 

technology. CODEX, the Association of Official Analytical Chemists, and all other countries use the drained weight fill of container. 

FDA shall revise the standard of identity for canned tuna to replace the pressed cake weight method with the drained weight 

method by December 31, 2013. FDA shall approve temporary marketing permits that adopt the drained weight method consistent 

with international standards until such time as final regulations 

are published updating the standard of identity for canned tuna. 

Impact on Small Businesses.—The Committee is concerned by 

unintended consequences of the Generic Drug User Fee Act 

(GDUFA) fee structure. While the Committee understands that 

user fees provide the resources to facilitate generic drug approvals, 

the Committee believes FDA should study the impact of smaller generic manufacturers’ ability to pay at the same level as large manufacturers. The Committee directs FDA to provide a report to the 

Committees on Appropriations on the impact of the GDUFA fee 

structure on smaller generic drug manufacturers within 180 days 

of enactment of this Act. 

Abuse-Deterrent Drugs.—The Committee supports FDA’s recent 

efforts to ensure that certain opioids are kept off the market and 

commends the agency for removal of those products for reasons of 

safety or effectiveness. The Committee understands that FDA established draft guidance in January 2013 entitled Evaluation and 

Labeling of Abuse-Deterrent Opioids, and encourages the agency to 

move expediently to finalize such guidance. 

Artificial Pancreas.—The Committee applauds the FDA for its 

final guidance for artificial pancreas device systems, released in 

November 2012, which provides clear and reasonable guidance for 

research and premarket review of such systems, which could transform the lives of those living with type 1 diabetes. The Committee 

urges the FDA to ensure that the flexible, science-based approach 

reflected in its guidance is implemented consistently in the IDE 

and PMA review process to ensure that safety and effectiveness of 

innovative systems can be tested without delay and improved devices can become available to those with type 1 diabetes in the 

near future. 

Compounding of Sterile Injectable Prescription Drugs.—The Committee urges the Food and Drug Administration to use its existing 

authority to closely inspect and supervise large-scale compounding 

and repackaging of sterile injectable drugs and biological products, 

especially those administered into areas where there is tempered 

immunity. 

Food Additive Petition.—The Committee understands that a Food 

Additive Petition has been submitted to the agency regarding the 

fortification of corn masa flour with folic acid to prevent neural 

tube defects such as spina bifida. The Committee encourages the 

agency to consider this petition expeditiously and, if further data 

or information is needed from the petitioners, to request it in a 

timely fashion to ensure that the petition is not unduly delayed. 

Pediatric Device Consortia Program.—The Committee is pleased 

with the success of the Pediatric Device Consortia Grant Program, 

authorized under Section 305 of Public Law 110–85. The program 

funds consortia to assist innovators in developing medical and surVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:12 Jun 19, 2013 Jkt 081455 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR116.XXX HR116

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
58 

gical devices designed for the unique needs of children, needs that 

often go unmet by devices currently available on the market. The 

consortia funded by this program have assisted in the development 

of over 219 pediatric device ideas since its inception. The Committee urges the FDA’s continued support of this important program. 

BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $5,186,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 8,788,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. – – – 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥5,186,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥8,788,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

The Committee does not provide an appropriation for the Building and Facilities account. 

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

2013 appropriation * ........................................................................... $205,294,000 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... 315,000,000 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. 194,555,000 

Comparison: 

2013 appropriation ...................................................................... ¥10,739,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥120,445,000 

* FY13 enacted level does not include the 251A sequester or Sec. 3004 OMB ATB. 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Committee provides an appropriation of $194,555,000, of which $35,500,000 is 

for the purchase of information technology. 

Regulations.—The Committee is concerned about duplicative and 

overreaching regulations that are resource intensive. The Committee includes bill language directing the Commission to submit 

cost-benefit studies of these regulations to the Committees of jurisdiction. 

Swap Dealer De Minimis.—The Committee directs the Commission to submit a report within 60 days of enactment to the Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate that: (1) quantifies 

the number of swap dealers currently registered with the Commission; (2) lists the aggregate gross notional amount of swap activity 

as of the date of enactment per CFTC regulation 1.3(ggg)(4) for 

each registered swap dealer without individually identifiable information; (3) estimates the number of additional swap dealers that 

will register with the Commission if the de minimis threshold is reduced to $3 billion; (4) lists each registered swap dealer, without 

individually identifiable information, that is deemed a Systemically 

Important Financial Institution by the Financial Stability Oversight Commission and/or the Financial Stability Board; and (5) lists 

the total revenue and assets of each registered swap dealer and 

corresponds with the data provided in criteria #2 and #3 without 

individually identifiable information. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
59 

Administrative Law Judges.—The Committee is concerned about 

the elimination of the Administrative Law Judges (ALJ) program 

and a possible reprogramming of those funds while an investigation 

regarding CFTC’s reduction-in-force is ongoing. Further questions 

have been raised by the Federal ALJ Conference regarding authority under the Administrative Procedures Act and best practices of 

CFTC’s intention to use non-ALJ hearing officers. Minimum requirements for such hearing officers do not include a law degree, 

but the officers would still be able to make administrative case law 

disbarring and disqualifying market participants. The additional 

fact that CFTC has sole authority to hire and fire these non-ALJ 

hearing officers removes their ability to make independent decisions free from political influence. 

Five-year Strategic Information Technology Plan.—The Committee directs CFTC to develop a five-year, strategic technology investment plan. This plan may be produced individually or incorporated as an appendix to the Commission’s five-year strategic 

plan. The plan should include achievable objectives with measurable results supported by projected resource requirements. The 

focus should be on market surveillance, risk management, and customer protection by transitioning from personnel to technology in 

today’s electronic marketplace. 

Pay Cost.—The Committee does not include requested funding 

for a civilian pay increase across the Commission. Should the 

President provide a civilian pay increase for 2014, it is assumed 

that the cost of such a pay increase will be absorbed within existing appropriations for fiscal year 2014. 

FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

2013 limitation .................................................................................... ($63,300,000) 

2014 budget estimate ......................................................................... (63,300,000) 

Provided in the bill ............................................................................. (61,900,000) 

Comparison: 

2013 limitation ............................................................................ ¥1,400,000 

2014 budget estimate .................................................................. ¥1,400,000 

COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

For a limitation on the expenses of the Farm Credit Administration, the Committee provides $61,900,000. 

Executive Compensation Regulation.—The bill includes language 

regarding FCA’s executive compensation regulation. 

FCA Administrative Expenses.—The Committee continues to be 

concerned about the increases in FCA’s administrative expenses, 

its growing assessments on Farm Credit System institutions, large 

carryover amounts, and the significant balance in its interest reserve fund. The Committee directs the agency to include a plan to 

substantially reduce its carryover in its fiscal year 2015 budget request. 

Limitation on Administrative Expenses.—The Committee provides FCA with authority to exceed its limitation by up to 10 percent upon notification to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
60 

TITLE VII 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS AND TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

The General Provisions contained in the accompanying bill for 

fiscal year 2014 are fundamentally the same as those included in 

last year’s appropriations bill. 

The following general provisions are included in the bill: 

Section 701: Limitation on the purchase of passenger motor vehicles. 

Section 702: Transfer authority regarding the Working Capital 

Fund. 

Section 703: Limitation on certain obligations. 

Section 704: Indirect cost rates for cooperative agreements with 

nonprofit institutions. 

Section 705: Disbursement of rural development loans. 

Section 706: Authority of the Chief Information Officer relating 

to new IT systems. 

Section 707: Availability of mandatory conservation program 

funding. 

Section 708: Rural Utility Service borrower eligibility. 

Section 709: Indirect costs related to research grants. 

Section 710: Availability of agency funds for information technology. 

Section 711: Funding availability for liquid infant formula. 

Section 712: Prohibition on first-class airline travel. 

Section 713: Use of funds authorized by the Commodity Credit 

Corporation Act. 

Section 714: Limitation on funds for commodities under the Bill 

Emerson Humanitarian Trust. 

Section 715: Funding for advisory committees. 

Section 716: Indirect costs for competitive agricultural research 

grants. 

Section 717: Language regarding the Food and Nutrition Act of 

2008. 

Section 718: Limitation on certain funds. 

Section 719: Limitation on certain funds. 

Section 720: Language on user fee proposals without offsets. 

Section 721: Language on reprogramming. 

Section 722: Language on fees for the business and industry 

guaranteed loan program. 

Section 723: Language on questions for the record. 

Section 724: Language regarding prepackaged news stories. 

Section 725: Language on prohibition on paid details in excess of 

30 days. 

Section 726: Language on the mohair program. 

Section 727: Rescission of certain unobligated balances. 

Section 728: Language regarding spending plans. 

Section 729: Rescission of certain unobligated balances. 

Section 730: Language on controls over humanitarian food assistance. 

Section 731: Use of funds for humanitarian food assistance programs. 

Section 732: Language on agency rental payments. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
61 

Section 733: Rescission of certain unobligated balances. 

Section 734: Rescission of certain unobligated balances. 

Section 735: Language regarding the Single Family Housing Direct Loan Program. 

Section 736: Limitation on certain funds. 

Section 737: Rescission of certain unobligated balances. 

Section 738: Rescission of certain unobligated balances. 

Section 739: Language regarding USDA loan programs. 

Section 740: This provision establishes a National Commission 

on Hunger. 

Section 741: Language is included regarding reprogramming of 

funds. 

Section 742: Language is included regarding regulations under 

the Packers and Stockyards Act. 

Section 743: Language is included regarding WIC. 

Section 744: Language is included regarding improper payments. 

Section 745: Language is included regarding nutrition programs. 

Section 746: Sense of Congress regarding hunger. 

Section 747: Language is included regarding rural housing. 

Section 748: Language is included regarding CFTC. 

Section 749: Language on horse slaughter. 

Section 750: Language is included for the Spending Reduction 

Account. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS 

TRANSFER OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following lists the transfers of unexpended 

balances included in the accompanying bill. 

1. Hazardous Materials Management.—The bill allows the funds 

appropriated to the Department for hazardous materials management to be transferred to agencies of the Department as required. 

2. Departmental Administration.—The bill requires reimbursement for expenses related to certain hearings. 

3. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations.— 

The bill allows a portion of the funds appropriated to the Office of 

the Assistant Secretary to be transferred to agencies. 

4. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.—Authority is included to enable the Secretary of Agriculture to transfer from other 

appropriations or funds of the Department such sums as may be 

necessary to combat emergency outbreaks of certain diseases of 

animals, plants, and poultry. 

5. Funds for Strengthening Markets, Income, and Supply.—The 

bill limits the transfer of section 32 funds to purposes specified in 

the bill. 

6. Farm Service Agency Salaries and Expenses.—The bill provides that funds provided to other accounts in the agency may be 

merged with the salaries and expenses account of the Farm Service 

Agency. 

7. Dairy Indemnity Program.—The bill authorizes the transfer of 

funds to the Commodity Credit Corporation, by reference. 

8. Commodity Credit Corporation.—The bill includes language allowing certain funds to be transferred to the Foreign Agricultural 

Service for information resource management activities. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
62 

9. Rural Development Salaries and Expenses.—The bill provides 

that prior year balances from certain accounts shall be transferred 

to and merged with this account. 

10. Rural Community Facilities Program Account, Rural Business Program Account, and Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account.—The bill provides that balances from the Rural 

Community Advancement Program may be transferred to and 

merged with these accounts. 

11. Child Nutrition Programs.—The bill includes authority to 

transfer section 32 funds to these programs. 

12. Foreign Agricultural Service Salaries and Expenses.—The bill 

allows for the transfer of funds from the Commodity Credit Corporation Export Loan Program Account. 

13. Food for Peace Title I Direct Credit and Food for Progress 

Program Account.—The bill allows funds to be transferred to the 

Farm Service Agency, Salaries and Expenses account. The bill also 

provides that funds made available for the cost of title I agreements and for title I ocean freight differential may be used interchangeably. 

14. Commodity Credit Corporation Export Loans Program.—The 

bill provides for transfer of funds to the Foreign Agricultural Service and to the Farm Service Agency for overhead expenses associated with credit reform. 

15. Food and Drug Administration, Salaries and Expenses.—The 

bill allows funds to be transferred among activities. 

16. General Provisions.—The bill allows unobligated balances of 

discretionary funds to be transferred to the Working Capital Fund. 

17. General Provisions.—The bill allows funds to be transferred 

to recover the full cost of space and security expenses. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
63 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 03 here HR116.001
64 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 04 here HR116.002
65 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 05 here HR116.003
66 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 06 here HR116.004
67 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 07 here HR116.005
68 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 08 here HR116.006
69 

CHANGES IN THE APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1)(A) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the following statements are submitted 

describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill that directly or indirectly change the application of existing law. 

The bill includes a number of provisions which place limitations 

on the use of funds in the bill or change existing limitations and 

which might, under some circumstances, be construed as changing 

the application of existing law: 

1. Office of the Secretary.—Language is included to limit the 

amount of funds for official reception and representation expenses, 

as determined by the Secretary. 

2. Departmental Administration.—Language is included to reimburse the agency for travel expenses incident to the holding of 

hearings. 

3. Agricultural Research Service.—Language is included that allows the Agricultural Research Service to grant easements at the 

Beltsville, MD, agricultural research center and to grant easements 

at any facility for the construction of a research facility for use by 

the agency. 

4. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.—A provision carried in the bill since fiscal year 1973 regarding state matching 

funds has been continued to assure more effective operation of the 

brucellosis control program through state cost sharing, with resulting savings to the Federal budget. 

Language is included to allow APHIS to recoup expenses incurred from providing technical assistance goods, or services to 

non-APHIS personnel, and to allow transfers of funds for agricultural emergencies. 

Language is included to limit the amount of funds for representational allowances. 

5. Agricultural Marketing Service, Limitation on Administrative 

Expenses.—The bill includes language to allow AMS to exceed the 

limitation on administrative expenses by 10 percent with notification to the Appropriations Committees. This allows flexibility in 

case crop size is understated and/or other uncontrollable events 

occur. 

6. Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration, Inspection and Weighing Services.—The bill includes authority to exceed the limitation on inspection and weighing services by 10 percent with notification to the Appropriations Committees. This allows for flexibility if export activities require additional supervision 

and oversight, or other uncontrollable factors occur. 

7. Dairy Indemnity Program.—Language is included by reference 

that allows the Secretary to utilize the services of the Commodity 

Credit Corporation for the purpose of making dairy indemnity payments. 

8. Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account.—Language is included that deems the pink bollworm a boll weevil for 

the purposes of administering the boll weevil loan program. 

9. Risk Management Agency.—Language is included to limit the 

amount of funds for official reception and representation expenses. 

10. Commodity Credit Corporation Fund.—Language is included 

to provide for the reimbursement appropriation. Language is also 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
70 

included to allow certain funds transferred from the Commodity 

Credit Corporation to be used for information resource management. In addition, language is included which limits the amount of 

funds that can be spent on operation and maintenance costs of 

CCC hazardous waste sites. 

11. Natural Resources Conservation Service—Conservation Operations.—Language which has been included in the bill since 1938 

prohibits construction of buildings on land not owned by the government, although construction on land owned by States and counties is permitted as authorized by law. 

12. Rural Development Salaries and Expenses.—Language is included to allow funds to be used for advertising and promotional 

activities and to limit the amount of funds to provide modest nonmonetary awards to non-USDA employees. 

13. Rental Assistance Program.—Language is included which provides that agreements entered into during the current fiscal year 

be funded for a one-year period. 

14. Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, 

and Children (WIC).—Language is included to purchase infant formula except in accordance with law and pay for activities that are 

not fully reimbursed by other departments or agencies unless authorized by law. 

15. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.—Language is 

included on funds availability for Employment and Training, the 

Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention Grant Program, and 

to enter into contracts and employ staff to conduct studies, evaluations, or to conduct activities related to program integrity. 

16. Foreign Agricultural Service.—Language carried since 1979 

enables this agency to use funds received by an advance or by reimbursement to carry out its activities involving international development and technical cooperation. Language is included to limit 

the amount of funds for official reception and representation expenses. 

17. Commodity Futures Trading Commission.—Language is included to limit the amount of funds for official reception and representation expenses. 

18. Farm Credit Administration.—The bill includes authority to 

exceed the limitation on assessments by 10 percent with notification to the Appropriations Committees. 

19. General Provisions.— 

Section 704: This provision provides that none of the funds in 

this Act may be made available to pay indirect costs charged 

against competitive agricultural research, education, or extension 

grants awarded by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture 

in excess of 10 percent of total direct costs. 

Section 705: This provision allows funds made available in the 

current fiscal year for the Rural Development Loan Fund program 

account; the Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans 

program account; and the Rural Housing Insurance Fund program 

account to remain available until expended to disburse obligations. 

Section 706: Language is included that requires approval of the 

Chief Information Officer and the concurrence of the Executive Information Technology Investment Review Board for acquisition of 

new information technology systems or significant upgrades, and 

that prohibits the transfer of funds to the Office of the Chief InforVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:11 Jun 19, 2013 Jkt 081455 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR116.XXX HR116

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
71 

mation Officer without the notification of the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress. 

Section 707: Language is included regarding the availability of 

funds for certain conservation programs. 

Section 708: Language is included regarding certain Rural Utilities Service Programs. 

Section 709: Language is included regarding indirect costs to 

grants made under section 412 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998. 

Section 710: Language is included that allows unobligated balances of the Farm Service Agency and Rural Development mission 

areas to be used for information technology purposes. 

Section 711: Language is included regarding reconstituted liquid 

concentrate infant formula issuance to WIC participants. 

Section 712: Language is included regarding the prohibition of 

first-class travel by the employees of agencies funded in this Act. 

Section 713: Language is included regarding the use of authorities of the Commodity Credit Corporation. 

Section 715: Language is included that limits the amount of 

spending for USDA Advisory Committees. 

Section 716: Language is included modifying matching requirements for certain research grants. 

Section 717: Language is included regarding the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008. 

Section 718: Language regarding certain limitations. 

Section 719: Language regarding certain limitations. 

Section 720: Language is included that prohibits funds from 

being used to prepare a budget submission to Congress that assumes reductions from the previous year’s budget due to user fee 

proposals unless the submission also identifies spending reductions 

which should occur if the user fees are not enacted. 

Section 721: Language is included that requires certain reprogramming procedures of funds provided in Appropriations Acts. 

Section 722: Language is included regarding fees for the business 

and industry guaranteed loan program. 

Section 723: This provision prohibits the Department of Agriculture or the Food and Drug Administration from transmitting or 

making available to any non-Department of Agriculture or non-Department of Health and Human Services employee questions or responses to questions that are a result of information requested for 

the appropriations hearing process. 

Section 724: Language regarding prepackaged news stories. 

Section 725: This provision prohibits any employee of the Department of Agriculture from being detailed or assigned to any other 

agency or office of the Department for more than 30 days unless 

the individual’s employing agency or office is fully reimbursed by 

the receiving agency or office for the salary and expenses of the employee for the period of assignment. 

Section 726: Language is included regarding the mohair program. 

Section 727: Rescission of certain unobligated balances. 

Section 729: Rescission of certain unobligated balances. 

Section 731: Language is included regarding the use of funds for 

humanitarian food assistance programs. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
72 

Section 732: Language is included regarding USDA agency rental 

payments. 

Section 733: Rescission of certain unobligated balances. 

Section 734: Rescission of certain unobligated balances. 

Section 735: Language regarding the Single Family Housing Direct Loan Program. 

Section 736: Language regarding certain limitations. 

Section 737: Rescission of certain unobligated balances. 

Section 738: Rescission of certain unobligated balances. 

Section 739: Language regarding USDA loan programs. 

Section 740: This provision establishes a National Commission 

on Hunger. 

Section 741: Language is included regarding reprogramming of 

funds. 

Section 742: Language is included regarding regulations under 

the Packers and Stockyards Act. 

Section 743: Language is included regarding WIC. 

Section 744: Language is included regarding improper payments. 

Section 745: Language is included regarding nutrition programs. 

Section 746: Sense of Congress regarding hunger. 

Section 747: Language is included regarding rural housing. 

Section 748: Language is included regarding CFTC. 

Section 749: Language on horse slaughter. 

Section 750: Language is included for the Spending Reduction 

Account. 

DISCLOSURE OF EARMARKS AND CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED

SPENDING ITEMS

Neither the bill nor the report contains any Congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 

clause 9 of rule XXI. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is a statement of general performance goals and objectives for which this measure authorizes funding: 

The Committee on Appropriations considers program performance, including a program’s success in developing and attaining 

outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding recommendations. 

PROGRAM DUPLICATION

No provision of this bill establishes or reauthorizes a program of 

the Federal Government known to be duplicative of another Federal program, a program that was included in any report from the 

Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to section 

21 of Public Law 111–139, or a program related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. 

DIRECTED RULE MAKING

The bill does not direct any rule making. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
73 

COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CL. 3(e) (RAMSEYER RULE)

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

CONSOLIDATED AND FURTHER CONTINUING 

APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2012 

(Public Law 112–55) 

* * * * * * * 

DIVISION A—AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VII 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS AND TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 732. (a) * * * 

(b) CONVEYANCE AUTHORITY.—With respect to an Agricultural 

Research Service facility to be closed pursuant to subsection (a), 

the Secretary of Agriculture may convey, with or without consideration, all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to 

any real property, including improvements and equipment thereon, 

of the facility to an eligible entity specified in subsection (c). If the 

Agricultural Research Service facility consists of more than one 

parcel of real property, the Secretary may convey each parcel separately and to different eligible entities. The conveyance authority 

provided by this subsection expires September 30, 2013, and all 

conveyances under this subsection must be completed by that date. 

The conveyance authority provided by this subsection expires September 30, 2014, and all conveyances under this subsection must be 

completed by that date. 

* * * * * * * 

FOOD AND NUTRITION ACT OF 2008 

* * * * * * * 

ADMINISTRATIVE COST-SHARING AND QUALITY CONTROL

SEC. 16. (a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(h) FUNDING OF EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAMS.— 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
74 

(1) IN GENERAL.— (A) AMOUNTS.—To carry out employment and training 

programs, the Secretary shall reserve for allocation to 

State agencies, to remain available for 15 months, from 

funds made available for each fiscal year under section 

18(a)(1), $90,000,000 for each fiscal year, except that for 

fiscal year 2013 and fiscal year 2014, the amount shall be 

$79,000,000. 

(B) ALLOCATION.—Funds made available under subparagraph (A) shall be made available to and reallocated 

among State agencies under a reasonable formula that— 

(i) is determined and adjusted by the Secretary; and 

(ii) takes into account the number of individuals 

who are not exempt from the work requirement under 

section 6(o). 

(C) REALLOCATION.—If a State agency will not expend 

all of the funds allocated to the State agency for a fiscal 

year under subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall reallocate the unexpended funds to other States (during the fiscal year or the subsequent fiscal year) as the Secretary 

considers appropriate and equitable. 

(D) MINIMUM ALLOCATION.—Notwithstanding subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall ensure that each State agency operating an employment and training program shall 

receive not less than $50,000 for each fiscal year. 

(E) ADDITIONAL ALLOCATIONS FOR STATES THAT ENSURE

AVAILABILITY OF WORK OPPORTUNITIES.— (i) IN GENERAL.—In addition to the allocations under 

subparagraph (A), from funds made available under 

section 18(a)(1), the Secretary shall allocate not more 

than $20,000,000 for each fiscal year to reimburse a 

State agency that is eligible under clause (ii) for the 

costs incurred in serving members of households receiving supplemental nutrition assistance program 

benefits who— 

(I) are not eligible for an exception under section 6(o)(3); and 

(II) are placed in and comply with a program 

described in subparagraph (B) or (C) of section 

6(o)(2). 

(ii) ELIGIBILITY.—To be eligible for an additional allocation under clause (i), a State agency shall make 

and comply with a commitment to offer a position in 

a program described in subparagraph (B) or (C) of section 6(o)(2) to each applicant or recipient who— 

(I) is in the last month of the 3-month period 

described in section 6(o)(2); 

(II) is not eligible for an exception under section 

6(o)(3); 

(III) is not eligible for a waiver under section 

6(o)(4); and 

(IV) is not exempt under section 6(o)(6). 

(2) If, in carrying out such program during such fiscal year, a 

State agency incurs costs that exceed the amount allocated to the 

State agency under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall pay such 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
75 

State agency an amount equal to 50 per centum of such additional 

costs, subject to the first limitation in paragraph (3), including the 

costs for case management and casework to facilitate the transition 

from economic dependency to self-sufficiency through work. 

(3) The Secretary shall also reimburse each State agency in an 

amount equal to 50 per centum of the total amount of payments 

made or costs incurred by the State agency in connection with 

transportation costs and other expenses reasonably necessary and 

directly related to participation in an employment and training program under section 6(d)(4), except that the amount of the reimbursement for dependent care expenses shall not exceed an amount 

equal to the payment made under section 6(d)(4)(I)(i)(II) but not 

more than the applicable local market rate, and such reimbursement shall not be made out of funds allocated under paragraph (1). 

(4) Funds provided to a State agency under this subsection may 

be used only for operating an employment and training program 

under section 6(d)(4), and may not be used for carrying out other 

provisions of this Act. 

(5) The Secretary shall monitor the employment and training 

programs carried out by State agencies under section 6(d)(4) to 

measure their effectiveness in terms of the increase in the numbers 

of household members who obtain employment and the numbers of 

such members who retain such employment as a result of their 

participation in such employment and training programs. 

* * * * * * * 

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1)(B) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in the accompanying bill which are not authorized by law for 

the period concerned: 

(In thousands of dollars) 

Agency/Program Last year of 

authorization 

Authorization 

level 

Appropriations in last 

year of authorization 

Appropriations in 

this bill 

Farm Service Agency: 

Dairy Indemnity Program .................................. 9/30/2013 Such sums Such sums Such sums 

Food and Nutrition Service: 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program .... 9/30/2013 Such sums 77,290,160 76,332,112 

Commodity Supplemental Food Program .......... 9/30/2013 Prior year 

caseload 

182,237 202,682 

The Emergency Food Assistance Program ........ 9/30/2013 100,000 48,160 45,592 

Foreign Agricultural Service: 

McGovern-Dole International Food for Education Program ............................................. 9/30/2013 Such sums 183,816 180,320 

National Institute of Food and Agriculture: 

Grants to upgrade facilities at 1890 institutions .............................................................. 9/30/2013 25,000 18,850 19,336 

Education Grants for Hispanic-serving institutions .............................................................. 9/30/2013 40,000 8,087 9,219 

Extension Service .............................................. 9/30/2013 Such sums 463,896 459,011 

Integrated research, education, and extension 

grants ........................................................... 9/30/2013 Such sums 20,942 31,137 

1994 institution research grants ..................... 9/30/2013 Such sums 1,756 1,801 

Grants for insular areas ................................... 9/30/2013 Such sums 1,609 1,800 

Agriculture and Food Research Initiative ......... 9/30/2013 700.000 290,468 290,657 

Rural Business-Cooperative Service: 

Value-added Agricultural Product Market Development Grants ......................................... 9/30/2013 40,000 14,623 15,000 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
76 

(In thousands of dollars) 

Agency/Program Last year of 

authorization 

Authorization level Appropriations in last 

year of authorization 

Appropriations in this bill 

Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural 

Areas ............................................................. 9/30/2013 5,000 2,193 2,250 

Rural Energy for America Program ................... 9/30/2013 25,000 3,315 3,000 

Rural Housing Service: 

Tribal College and University essential community facilities ........................................... 9/30/2013 10,000 3,284 3,284 

Multi-family Housing Revitalization Program ... 9/30/2013 13,000 27,084 27,084 

Rural Utilities Service: 

Distance Learning and Telemedicine ............... 9/30/2013 100,000 24,323 24,323 

Broadband telecommunications services ......... 9/30/2013 25,000 3,899 5,500 

Broadband telecommunications grants ............ 9/30/2013 10,372 10,372 10,111 

RESCISSIONS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following lists the rescissions of unexpended 

balances included in the accompanying bill: The bill proposes rescissions of $180,000,000 of funds derived 

from interest on the cushion of credit payments under the Rural 

Economic Development Loans Program Account; $206,000,000 from 

Section 32 funds; $30,000,000 from Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments; $2,017,000 from the Natural Resources Conservation Service; $1,314,000 from the Rural Housing 

Service; $41,000,000 from the bioenergy program; $40,694,000 from 

the biorefinery program; and $15,000,000 from the value-added 

grant program. 

COMPARISON WITH THE BUDGET RESOLUTION

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives and section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974, the following table compares the levels of new 

budget authority provided in the bill with the appropriate allocation under section 302(b) of the Budget Act: 

(In millions of dollars) 

302(b) Allocation This bill 

Budget 

authority Outlays Budget authority Outlays 

Discretionary ........................................................................................... 19,450 22,451 19,450 1 21,294 

Mandatory ............................................................................................... 42,981 30,298 42,981 1 30,298 

1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

FIVE-YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

Pursuant to section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional Budget Act 

of 1974, the following table contains five-year projections prepared 

by the Congressional Budget Office of outlays associated with the 

budget authority provided in the accompanying bill: (In millions of dollars) 

Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2014 ........................................................................................................... 1 117,128 

2015 ........................................................................................................... 4,029 

2016 ........................................................................................................... 755 

2017 ........................................................................................................... 16 

2018 and future years .............................................................................. ¥1,768 1 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
77 

ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Pursuant to section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional Budget Act 

of 1974, the amounts of financial assistance to State and local governments is as follows: 

(In millions of dollars) 

Budget Authority ............................................................................................. 37,974 

Outlays ............................................................................................................. 1 36,142 1 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
78 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 013 here HR116.007
79 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 014 here HR116.008
80 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 015 here HR116.009
81 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 016 here HR116.010
82 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 017 here HR116.011
83 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 018 here HR116.012
84 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 019 here HR116.013
85 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 020 here HR116.014
86 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 021 here HR116.015
87 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 022 here HR116.016
88 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 023 here HR116.017
89 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 024 here HR116.018
90 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 025 here HR116.019
91 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 026 here HR116.020
92 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 027 here HR116.021
93 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 028 here HR116.022
94 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 029 here HR116.023
95 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 030 here HR116.024
96 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 031 here HR116.025
97 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 032 here HR116.026
98 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 033 here HR116.027
99 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 034 here HR116.028
100 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 035 here HR116.029
101 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 036 here HR116.030
102 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 037 here HR116.031
103 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 038 here HR116.032
104 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 039 here HR116.033
(105) 

MINORITY VIEWS OF THE HONORABLE NITA LOWEY AND 

THE HONORABLE SAM FARR 

We are dismayed by the House Republican leadership’s refusal to 

go to conference to forge a bipartisan agreement on the budget resolution that addresses sequestration and provides workable 302(b) 

allocations for Appropriations bills. This imperils this year’s process, making it impossible to move all 12 bills. Sequestration was 

intended to be a mechanism to force the parties to come together 

to address our long-term fiscal challenges. It was never meant to 

be, in itself, a tool for deficit reduction, and it was certainly never 

meant to be the basis for the discretionary spending cap in a budget resolution. 

If the current 302(a) allocation stays in place, the House will 

likely pass only a few bills with reasonable allocations, while the 

remaining bills will be given inadequate funding and may not go 

to the House floor. With the Ryan budget as the basis for discretionary spending, there will undoubtedly be one or more continuing 

resolutions needed to keep the government open and running. 

As a result of the Committee’s inadequate overall allocation, the 

Agriculture subcommittee received an unacceptably low 302(b) allocation of $19.450 billion. This is $520 million (2.6%) below the CBO 

estimate of the President’s request for the bill. However, the President’s 2014 budget moved the Food for Peace program to the State, 

Foreign Operations bill. The 2014 Agriculture bill allocation, which 

assumes Food for Peace is funded in this bill, is $1.3 billion (6.2%) 

lower than the original 2013 conference agreement last fall, which 

also included Food for Peace funding. 

The impact of this allocation is evident in the inadequate funding 

provided for many important accounts in the bill. 

For example, we estimate that some 214,000 eligible applicants 

would be denied participation in WIC at the funding level in the 

bill. Compared to the President’s request, we estimate there would 

be 454,000 unserved, eligible applicants. These estimates assume, 

as required in the bill, that no funds are used for breastfeeding 

counselors or for helping states convert from paper benefit vouchers to electronic benefit cards, an important and needed management reform. The bill could not even cover participation for all eligible individuals with use of the entire contingency fund. 

While the report suggests the President’s budget estimates of 

participation in the program ‘‘have been inflated,’’ it does not explain why the majority believes the funding level in the bill is sufficient to serve all eligible applicants. In fact, the President’s budget 

request for fiscal year 2012 was far closer to the actual spending 

level for that year than the funding bill enacted by Congress. In 

2012, despite pleas from House Democrats, Congress underfunded 

WIC so severely that USDA had to transfer $400 million from 

SNAP to WIC on an emergency basis. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
106 

Another critical program, Food for Peace, is also severely underfunded. While there may be debate about the administration’s proposed reforms to the U.S. food aid program, there is no doubt that 

failing to adequately fund it is a tragic mistake. The bill cuts the 

program by $284 million (19.8%) below 2013 and $275 million 

(19.3%) below the 2014 request. Based on the average cost per person served in 2012, we believe more than 7.4 million people would 

not receive food assistance from the United States as a result of the 

House funding level. 

Shockingly, the Republican majority also continues its efforts to 

prevent the Commodity Futures Trading Commission from doing 

its vital work to provide greater transparency and competition in 

markets, more certainty for the farmers, ranchers, and small businesses that use these markets, and protection of taxpayers from 

having to pay for future bailouts. This bill funds the agency at 

$194.555 million, which is $10.7 million (5.2%) below the 2013 base 

the Republican bills use and $120 million (38%) below the 2014 request. The Republican majority must drop the pretense that DoddFrank is going to be repealed and provide the agency the resources 

it needs to write and enforce the law. 

We are troubled by language in the bill blocking a regulation by 

the Farm Credit Administration that provides for non-binding, advisory votes by shareholders on the compensation of the presidents 

and senior executives of member banks. 

In addition to these concerns, we note that several troublesome 

riders were adopted in full committee. 

We are concerned by the adoption of language requiring that 

white potatoes be added to the list of eligible foods in the WIC program. This rider was opposed by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Public Health Association and the March of 

Dimes, among others, because it violates the long-standing tradition of not interfering in science-based decisions about WIC foods. 

The current food package is based on extensive study, including 

recommendations by the Institute of Medicine. Political interference with that process will undermine the program and threaten 

its proven record of contributing to the health of mothers, infants 

and children. 

The Committee adopted a rider that bars a state from receiving 

any funds in the bill unless the state is in ‘‘full compliance’’ with 

certain eligibility requirements of the SNAP program. This amendment would have vast, negative consequences on states, their 

economies and on participants in a wide variety of USDA programs 

if it became law. While compliance with eligibility is a goal we all 

share, the most recent data shows the program already has an extremely low total error rate—the lowest in its history—3.8%, and 

overpayment errors are less than 3%. 

In Texas, for example, the total error rate for SNAP was below 

the national level, at 3.48%. Despite that commendable record, a 

single error in eligibility under the law cited in the amendment apparently would cause Texas to lose all the funding it receives in 

this bill. Had this been law in 2012, Texas would have lost, for example: $1,709,395,000 for 569 million lunches and 304 million 

breakfasts at more than 8100 schools and $561,000,000 that served 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
107 

an average of 970,000 women, infants and children a month in the 

WIC program. 

We do not see why the bill should carry language related to 

Dodd-Frank that should be considered in an authorization bill and 

that, in fact, is in an authorization bill, H.R. 1256, that passed the 

House just two days before the full Committee considered this bill. 

This unnecessary provision will only complicate consideration of 

the bill as it goes forward. 

We also see no reason for carrying language that was enacted in 

2012 that blocks certain protections for small livestock producers, 

since USDA promulgated a final rule in 2011 fully consistent with 

that rider. We believe if there are any lingering concerns about this 

issue, they should be addressed in the pending farm bill. We hope 

that this rider will be dropped. 

While we will do our best to address the many shortcomings of 

this bill as the process moves forward, we do not support the bill 

in its current form. 

NITA M. LOWEY. 

SAM FARR. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(108) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS ON INTERNATIONAL FOOD AID OF THE

HONORABLE NITA LOWEY

The United States is a generous nation and since the 1950s has 

fed billions of people around the world through the Food for Peace 

program. When originally designed, it served two goals—to help 

U.S. farmers by dealing with surplus commodities in a way that 

would boost prices and to meet a humanitarian imperative by feeding people in crisis. 

However, nearly sixty years later, the world has changed and the 

program needs to respond. The United States does not have the 

surpluses it did decades ago and it is now forced to purchase food 

on the commercial markets. Near record-high farm prices have 

meant our food aid dollars do not go as far. According to independent analyses, the number of direct recipients of our food aid 

has dropped from 74 million in 2006 to an average of 30 million 

more recently. 

The Green Revolution of the 1970s increased agricultural production worldwide, breaking the cycle of famine in many developing 

countries. Research has shown that famine and hunger are not necessarily caused by the lack of food, but frequently by lack of access 

to available food, often driven by conflict. According to a 2009 report by GAO, this locally-available food is a quarter to a third less 

expensive than in-kind food aid. In addition to being cheaper, buying food locally often means more culturally appropriate and nutritious options. 

The current Food for Peace program also includes a requirement 

that half of American food aid must be transported on U.S.-flagged 

ships. Not only is this more costly, but in emergencies where delay 

can have deadly consequences, various studies have shown that it 

will take 70–100 days longer than purchasing the food regionally. 

In many conflicts, importing and transporting large quantities of 

commodity food is dangerous, or even logistically impossible. Taken 

with the lack of existing surpluses in the United States and the opportunity in many cases to support developing country farmers in 

the region, the current cargo transport requirement no longer 

makes sense. 

Given these factors, I welcomed the Administration’s proposal to 

reform the food aid program as part of the FY 2014 budget request. 

The country’s current fiscal crisis demands that all policymakers 

take a critical and judicious look at each program the government 

funds to determine whether it is efficient and effective in reaching 

its objective. With the lack of agricultural surpluses in our country, 

the sole remaining objective of our food aid programs should be to 

serve the maximum number of people in need in the most cost effective way possible. 

Therefore, I am disappointed that the FY 2014 Agriculture Appropriations bill not only rejects the Administration’s proposal for 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
109 

reform but does nothing to improve the effectiveness of food aid 

programs in any way. This is despite the clearly documented deficiencies of the current program. The Administration’s proposal 

would shift the food aid program to the State, Foreign Operations 

bill into three separate accounts: International Disaster Assistance, 

Development Assistance, and a new Emergency Food Assistance 

Contingency Fund. The proposal guarantees that more than half of 

the emergency assistance would still be procured domestically and 

that development programs would continue as a critical element of 

U.S. response to global hunger and resilience. Monetization would 

be replaced with direct funding for programs, cutting out middlemen and reducing leakage. Emergency food aid would be supplemented with more flexible tools such as vouchers and purchases 

from local suppliers extending the reach of our support. With the 

same amount of resources and these careful reforms, the Administration estimates that their proposal could feed 2 to 4 million additional people. The Center for Global Development’s recent analysis 

shows that the proposal could help as many as 10 million additional people. 

While these programs are funded through this bill, the United 

States Agency for International Development (USAID) has been 

implementing Food for Peace for many years. Both transparency 

and oversight would be improved by consolidating the funding and 

the implementing agency in one bill. For both emergency and nonemergency programs, these programs can gain efficiencies by seamless planning, implementation, and evaluation with other USAID 

humanitarian and food security programs. 

The crisis in the Horn of Africa, the current devastation of the 

communities in Syria, and the fragile nature of chronically hungry 

places like the Sahel region of Africa call us to be responsible stewards of resources, both for United States taxpayers and the people 

around the world who depend on our assistance. These reforms are 

proven—monetization programs in the Democratic Republic of the 

Congo are only earning $0.51 for every dollar of commodities provided. I hope the many stakeholders and congressional committees 

involved in these programs can work together to ensure that 

United States food aid programs remain an effective expression of 

U.S. generosity to the world’s most vulnerable people. 

NITA M. LOWEY. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(110) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF THE HONORABLE SAM FARR

Though the appropriation to the FDA overall is slightly more 

than last year, it bears noting that FDA resources are artificially 

constrained due to the sequestration of user fees. Just as sequestration has artificially driven allocations to the committee to new 

lows, it also has the unintended consequence of denying the FDA 

access to user fees paid by industry to the agency to help cover 

costs associated with testing, review and approval of new drugs, 

medical devices and health treatments. For example, more than 

2700 generic drug applications are backlogged and have little 

chance of moving expeditiously through the approval process because of the restriction on resources—in this case, $85 million paid 

in FY13 that cannot be spent. Granted, the matter of sequestration 

is larger than its single impact on the FDA, nonetheless the impact 

is real and had sequestration not occurred the FDA would have significantly more resources available to it—resources paid directly by 

industry, not taxpayers—than can be appropriated under this bill. 

We do a disservice to the public if we do not try to address this 

matter. 

SAM FARR. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING