[House Report 110-258]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



110th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    110-258

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



 
   AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2008

                                _______
                                

 July 24, 2007.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

   Ms. DeLauro, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 3161]

    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 2008.

                              INTRODUCTION


                       Investing in Rural America


                             RURAL HOUSING

    The Committee held a special hearing to discuss economic 
conditions in rural America with USDA's Economic Research 
Service (ERS). A recent ERS report found that 302 of the 
America's non-metro counties are ``housing stressed.'' ERS 
said:

          In these counties, at least 30 percent of households 
        failed to meet widely used standards for minimum basic 
        amenities in 2000. This categorization of household-
        level housing stress requires that one or more of the 
        following conditions be met: (1) housing expense/income 
        threshold--expenses exceed 30 percent of income, (2) 
        crowding--more household members than rooms, (3) 
        incomplete plumbing--home lacked necessary bathroom 
        facilities, and (4) incomplete kitchen--home lacked 
        essential kitchen facilities.

    These are shocking findings. To begin addressing these 
needs, the bill makes significant investments in rural housing. 
The bill includes $212 million to provide $5.1 billion in 
affordable direct and guaranteed home loans for low- and 
moderate-income families in rural areas, with no increase in 
fees. The President's budget eliminated direct loans and 
shifted funding to guaranteed loans with a one percent increase 
in fees, making these loans more expensive and not as 
accessible for low-income families. The bill restores the 
multi-family rental housing program and provides four times the 
level of funding for mutual and self-help housing grants, which 
allow low-income families in rural areas to build their own 
houses. The bill substantially increases funding for the farm 
labor housing programs, supporting $75 million in affordable 
loans and grants for farmworker housing.

                      CLEAN WATER IN RURAL AMERICA

    According to government estimates, rural communities face 
tens of billions of dollars in costs for safe drinking water 
and wastewater treatment systems. USDA water and waste funding 
is only available to communities that cannot fund the projects 
themselves or that cannot get financing commercially at 
reasonable rates. USDA programs also give priority to smaller 
communities, those with serious health needs and lower incomes. 
Yet, these programs are already over-subscribed. As of 
September 30, 2006 there were 985 applications seeking $2.3 
billion in assistance that could not be funded.
    To begin addressing these needs, the bill provides $500 
million for rural water and waste disposal grants and $1 
billion for water and waste direct loans. Importantly, the bill 
reverses the administration's proposed cut to the grant program 
and provides a 14 percent ($62 million) increase over 2007 
levels.

                      SUPPORTING RURAL COMMUNITIES

    Federal investment is critical to facilitate growth in 
rural areas, and to soften the impact of population loss. The 
bill provides a 37 percent increase in grants to rural areas 
for critical community facilities, such as health care, 
educational, public safety and day care facilities and also 
provides increases in the community facility loan programs. 
Rural areas often confront a tremendous gap when it comes to 
educational and medical resources and this bill helps close 
that gap, providing $10 million more than the administration 
requested for distance learning and telemedicine grants. It 
also restores funding to twice the level provided in 2007 for 
the broadband grant program that the budget eliminated.

                        Protecting Public Health


                              FOOD SAFETY

    As many recent recalls have shown--from spinach and seafood 
to peanut butter and pet-food--our food safety system today is 
dangerously inadequate. Consumers have reason to worry that the 
system they count on to protect them is no longer working, and 
the food they feed their families is not as safe as it should 
be. That must change. We must transform the way we meet our 
obligation to protect the public health.
    This bill fully funds the request for the Food Safety and 
Inspection Service at USDA. To maximize the funds' positive 
impact on safety, the bill shifts additional funds within the 
account to address vacancies in federal meat inspector 
positions. The Committee also provides an increase of $28 
million over the budget request for food safety at the Food and 
Drug Administration (FDA) for what it hopes will be the first 
step in a fundamental transformation in the regulation of food 
safety at FDA. The Committee directs FDA to submit a plan to 
begin changing its approach to food safety when it submits the 
fiscal year 2009 budget, giving the Committee time to review 
the plan before the funds to implement it become available on 
July 1, 2008. In addition to these funds, the bill provides 
more than $131 million for food safety research at USDA

                      FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

    The Committee fully funds the request for the FDA and 
provides targeted increases of $55 million. As noted above, the 
Committee provides an increase for food safety activities 
following submission of a comprehensive plan by the 
administration. It also ensures that funding levels for FDA's 
field operations are not reduced and provides additional 
funding for key activities, such as speeding up generic drug 
application reviews, post-market drug safety reviews and review 
of direct to consumer drug ads.

                 Improving Nutrition for More Americans


                               NUTRITION

    The bill provides critical resources to address our 
nation's obesity crisis, teaching our children better eating 
habits and helping them avoid conditions such as diabetes which 
afflict so many children today. The bill provides a nearly 
eight percent increase over 2007 funding, including a record 
level of funding for the Expanded Food and Nutrition Education 
Program (EFNEP) at $68.5 million.

                         FEEDING THOSE IN NEED

    The bill provides record funding for two fundamental food 
security programs: the Supplemental Nutrition Program for 
Women, Infants and Children (WIC) and the Commodity 
Supplemental Food Program (CSFP). These programs serve our 
country's most vulnerable populations. Nearly 30 percent of the 
total discretionary funding in this bill goes to the WIC 
program. To meet increased program costs due to rising food 
prices, the Committee has provided an increase of $416 million 
over the 2007 level and $233 million over the request. The bill 
also provides $150 million for the CSFP program, which the 
President's budget eliminated. This level will both increase 
caseloads in current states and allow additional states to 
participate in the program. The bill also includes language 
that will ease administrative burdens on states that wish to 
participate in the summer food program, which the Committee 
believes will allow many more children to be reached by this 
program. Working poor households should not have to choose 
between securing adequate food for their kids and other basics 
they need just to get by.

                     Transforming Our Energy Future


                            RENEWABLE ENERGY

    Energy independence means investing in our communities and 
plugging their resources and workforce into vibrant, expanding 
markets. To promote renewable energy and move us further down 
the path to energy independence, the bill provides nearly twice 
as much funding than was provided last year and more than 20 
percent more than requested. The bill provides resources for 
research, assistance to farmers and ranchers, and loans to 
businesses. It makes investments across the spectrum in order 
to grow our economy, create new jobs, lower energy prices, and 
begin to address global warming.

                        SUPPORTING CONSERVATION

    The stewardship of our lands affects us all everyday and 
will affect our children for years to come. But existing 
conservation programs are under-funded. This bill restores many 
of the programs slated for major reductions in the president's 
request, including the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative, 
Resource Conservation and Development, and the watershed 
programs which are funded $75 million--more than double last 
year's levels.

                         INVESTING IN RESEARCH

    As we all know, research is at the core of maintaining U.S. 
agriculture's place in the forefront of scientific discovery 
and development. And these efforts are critical to maintaining 
our edge in areas such as crop development, nutrition research, 
food safety and immediate responsiveness to incoming threats. 
For research at our nation's universities and other important 
activities under CSREES, the mark provides an increase of $179 
million over the President's request for CSREES, including $109 
million for research and education. For federally funded 
research, the bill provides an increase of $54.8 million over 
the President's budget.

                           Enhanced Oversight

    The Committee shares concerns about waste, fraud and abuse 
in key farm programs such as those run by the Farm Service 
Agency and the Risk Management Agency. The Committee has 
included language requested by the administration to allow the 
Risk Management Agency to use up to $11,166,000 in mandatory 
crop insurance funds to strengthen its ability to oversee the 
program by maintaining and upgrading IT systems and other 
methods of detecting dubious claims. Continuing work on an 
information management system will assist RMA and the Farm 
Service Agency in spotting potential problems in programs under 
both agencies. The Committee has also included an increase of 
$2 million for the Office of Inspector General for high 
priority work on waste, fraud and abuse, as part of a long term 
effort to rebuild the office's resources.
    Finally, the Committee makes note throughout this report of 
agencies that are delinquent in responding to OIG or Government 
Accountability Office reports and calls for plans from such 
agencies for how they will respond to such reports promptly.
                     TITLE I--AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS

                 Production, Processing, and Marketing

                        Office of the Secretary




2007 appropriation....................................        $5,097,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        18,355,000
Provided in the bill..................................         5,505,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +408,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       -12,850,000



                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the Secretary, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $5,505,000, an increase of $408,000 above the 
amount available for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of 
$12,850,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation includes a total of $1,611,000 
for cross-cutting trade negotiations and biotechnology 
resources.
    The Committee does not include funding for provisional 
reconstruction team as requested.
    Explanatory Notes.--The Committee appreciates receiving the 
detailed information provided in the Explanatory Notes prepared 
by the Department and relies heavily on this information when 
considering budget proposals. These materials have 
traditionally been prepared for the sole use of the 
Appropriations Committee in a format consistent with the 
organization and operation of the programs and the structure of 
the Appropriations Act. At the direction of the Office of 
Management and Budget, the Department has changed the format 
and content of these materials to focus on broader goals and 
objectives rather than the major program structure followed in 
the Act and in the actual conduct of the programs. For fiscal 
year 2009 and future years, the Department is directed to 
present Explanatory Notes in a format consistent with the 
presentation used for the fiscal year 2002 Budget. Any 
deviations from that format are to be approved in advance by 
the Committee.
    State Office Collocation.--The Committee continues to 
direct that any reallocation of resources related to the 
collocation of state offices scheduled for 2008 and subsequent 
years is subject to the Committee's reprogramming procedures.
    Administrative Provision.--The Committee directs the 
Secretary to advise the Committees on Appropriations in writing 
of the status of all reports requested of the Department in 
this bill, at the time of submission of the fiscal year 2009 
budget and quarterly thereafter.
    The Committee reminds the Secretary that all correspondence 
related to the directives in this bill must be addressed to the 
Committee on Appropriations.
    High-Risk List.--The Committee directs USDA and FDA to work 
with GAO on a plan whose implementation would result in food 
safety being removed from GAO's High-Risk List and to submit a 
report on that plan to the Committee by October 1, 2007.
    Minors in Agriculture.--The Committee is concerned with the 
number of injuries and deaths of minors in agriculture. Current 
child labor law permits children as young as 12 years of age to 
work in the fields under very specific limitations, such as 
non-hazardous work that occurs beyond school hours. However, 
according to a 1998 U.S. Government Accountability Office 
report, workplace hazards, including pesticides, heat stress, 
heavy machinery, and sharp tools, combine to injure more than 
100,000 children on farms every year. Between 1992 and 2000, 
more than 40 percent of all work-related deaths of minors in 
the U.S. occurred in agriculture. The Committee directs the 
Secretary of USDA, in collaboration with the Secretary of 
Labor, to develop a plan to address injuries and deaths of 
minors in agriculture and to submit the plan to the Committee 
by March 1, 2008.
    The Committee is concerned that the USDA's RUS Broadband 
Loan Program has not made sufficient corrective actions in 
response to the critical September 2005 report by the USDA 
Office of the Inspector General. In particular, the Committee 
is concerned that instead of focusing on un-served rural areas 
that have no broadband service, the RUS continues to grant 
loans to areas where broadband service is already being offered 
by private providers. Such practices penalize private providers 
that have already built broadband systems in these areas. Such 
practices also do nothing to further the goal of bringing 
broadband to un-served areas with no broadband while also 
putting at risk taxpayer dollars by funding projects where 
private sector competition already exists. The Committee 
directs the USDA's Office of the Inspector General to reexamine 
the RUS Broadband Loan Program and issue a comprehensive 
follow-up report, which also details in particular:
     How many un-served households were included in 
approved RUS Broadband Loan Program applications.
     How many applications were granted to applicants 
proposing to serve areas where one or more private broadband 
providers already offered service.
     How many approved loans (and their total amount) 
have defaulted since the program's inception.
     How many applicants who have been approved for 
loans have subsequently withdrawn from the program due to the 
eventually discovered infeasibility of the approved project.
    Apple Moth.--The Committee encourages the Secretary to 
utilize all funds necessary from the Commodity Credit 
Corporation to carry out the recommendation of the USDA science 
advisory panel to eradicate in California the light brown apple 
moth.
    With two thirds of the USDA budget devoted to nutrition 
programs, the Committee urges the Department of Agriculture to 
thoroughly examine ways of linking local agriculture to 
nutrition program procurement. To the extent possible, the 
committee encourages the Department to identify funding sources 
to link local agriculture directly with nutrition programs 
serving seniors, school breakfast and lunch programs. The 
Committee notes growing interest in local procurement among 
school food service systems across the country. Local 
procurement can help farmers develop consistent markets for 
fresh food produced locally. The Committee encourages the 
Department to work with school lunch administrators, food banks 
and local food advocates to identify opportunities for growth 
in local procurement, and directs FNS to study ways to enhance 
local procurement in school food service and report back to the 
Committee within 120 days of enactment of this act.

                          Executive Operations


                            CHIEF ECONOMIST




2007 appropriation....................................       $10,487,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        11,347,000
Provided in the bill..................................        10,847,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +360,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................          -500,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Chief Economist, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $10,847,000, an increase of $360,000 above the 
amount available for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of 
$500,000 below the budget request.

                       NATIONAL APPEALS DIVISION




2007 appropriation....................................       $14,466,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        15,056,000
Provided in the bill..................................        15,056,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +590,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS
    For the National Appeals Division, the Committee provides 
an appropriation of $15,056,000, an increase of $590,000 above 
the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and the same amount 
as the budget request.

                 OFFICE OF BUDGET AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS




2007 appropriation....................................        $8,270,000
2008 budget estimate..................................         9,035,000
Provided in the bill..................................         8,622,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +352,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................          -413,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of Budget and Program Analysis, the 
Committee provides an appropriation of $8,622,000, an increase 
of $352,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and 
a decrease of $413,000 below the budget request.

                        HOMELAND SECURITY STAFF




2007 appropriation....................................          $931,000
2008 budget estimate..................................         2,412,000
Provided in the bill..................................         2,252,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +1,321,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................          -160,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Homeland Security Staff, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $2,252,000, an increase of $1,321,000 above 
the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of 
$160,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation includes an increase of 
$1,274,000 for additional staff years transferred to the 
Homeland Security Staff from the Office of Inspector General.

                Office of the Chief Information Officer





2007 appropriation....................................       $16,361,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        17,024,000
Provided in the bill..................................        16,723,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +362,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................          -301,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the Chief Information Officer, the 
Committee provides an appropriation of $16,723,000, an increase 
of $362,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and 
a decrease of $301,000 below the budget request.
    E-gov assessments.--The Committee is deeply troubled by the 
escalating costs of electronic government (``e-gov'') 
initiatives. Between fiscal years 2005 and 2006, the amount 
USDA agencies paid for e-gov initiatives rose by 45 percent--
from $33,837,000 to $49,086,000. Within these totals, the 
amount for presidential e-gov initiatives increased over two 
and a half times--from $8,609,000 in 2005 to $22,953,000 in 
2006. Since these costs are borne by the agencies and Congress 
did not provide increases to the agencies for these costs, in 
most circumstances the agencies must absorb the rising costs of 
e-gov initiatives by cutting back on program funding.
    The Committee supports efforts to make government more 
efficient and user-friendly, but not at the expense of core 
programs. The Committee directs the Office of the Chief 
Information Officer to scrutinize the need for each e-gov 
initiative, both presidential and departmental; to consider its 
benefit to the mission of each agency; and to limit 2007 and 
2008 spending to the 2005 level wherever possible. A report 
should be submitted to the Committee by January 15, 2008, 
outlining the OCIO's findings and the funding levels for both 
years. In addition, the Department's fiscal year 2009 budget 
should include a justification for funding each initiative, a 
description of how increases would be funded, and the impact on 
agency programs of the funding increases.
    Audit recommendations not achieving management decision 
within 180 days.--The Committee has received from the Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) for the record a list of audit reports 
where management decisions have not been achieved within 180 
days. Included on the list was one audit report for OCIO, with 
several open recommendations. The Committee supports OIG in its 
efforts to reach agreement within 180 days and directs OCIO to 
send the Committee a report by October 1, 2007 with a plan for 
reaching management decision on the outstanding issues.

                      Common Computing Environment





2007 appropriation....................................      $107,971,000
2008 budget estimate..................................                 0
Provided in the bill..................................                 0
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................      -107,971,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    The President's budget does not request, and the Committee 
does not recommend, an appropriation for the Common Computing 
Environment. The Committee recommendation includes funding for 
the Common Computing Environment activities in the appropriate 
agency accounts.
    Since fiscal year 2001, Congress has appropriated over 
$711,134,000 for the modernization and integration of 
information systems in USDA's county field offices. The 
Committee has fully supported this effort, but will expect to 
see reduced or level funding levels for this account in future 
budget submissions as a result of anticipated efficiencies and 
economies of scale.
    The Committee directs the Department to continue reporting 
to the Committee on Appropriations on a quarterly basis on the 
implementation of the Common Computing Environment.

                 Office of the Chief Financial Officer





2007 appropriation....................................        $5,850,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        30,863,000
Provided in the bill..................................         6,076,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +226,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       -24,787,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, the 
Committee provides an appropriation of $6,076,000, an increase 
of $226,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and 
a decrease of $24,787,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee includes authority in section 703 of the 
general provisions that allows for unobligated discretionary 
balances transferred to the Working Capital Fund to be used for 
the acquisition of plant and capital equipment for the delivery 
of the Financial Management Modernization Initiative.
    The Committee directs the Department to submit a report 
concurrent with the Department's annual budget submission for 
the following fiscal year, updating the Committee on its 
contracting out policies, including agency budgets for 
contracting out, for fiscal year 2007. The Committee is 
continuing bill language requiring the submission of the report 
on contracting out policies and agency budgets, prior to use of 
any funds appropriated to the Office of the Chief Financial 
Officer for FAIR Act or Circular A-76 activities.
    The Committee directs the Secretary to continue providing 
quarterly reports on the status of continuity of operations of 
the National Finance Center, remote mirror imaging, the 
reestablishment of payroll and cross-servicing operations and 
function in New Orleans, selection for a new alternate 
worksite, and plans for the new primary computing facility.
    Assessments.--As with charges for electronic government 
initiatives, the assessments that the Department charges its 
agencies for other government- and department-wide activities 
have risen steeply. Between fiscal years 2005 and 2006, these 
assessments increased by almost 30 percent--from $10.8 million 
to $13.8 million. 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 directs the Office of the Chief Financial 
Officer to scrutinize the need for each activity, excluding 
electronic government initiatives; to consider its benefit to 
the mission of each agency; and to limit 2007 and 2008 spending 
to the 2005 level wherever possible. A report should be 
submitted to the Committee by January 15, 2008, outlining 
OCFO's findings and funding levels for both years. In addition, 
the Department's fiscal year 2009 budget should include a 
justification for funding each activity, how increases would be 
funded, and the impact on funding the increases on agency 
programs. The Department should also include an exhibit showing 
assessments by agency in addition to the exhibit submitted in 
the FY 2008 budget.

           Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights





2007 appropriation....................................          $818,000
2008 budget estimate..................................           897,000
Provided in the bill..................................           897,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................           +79,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 
the Committee provides an appropriation of $897,000, an 
increase of $79,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 
2007 and the same amount as the budget request.

                         Office of Civil Rights





2007 appropriation....................................       $20,020,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        23,147,000
Provided in the bill..................................        23,147,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +3,127,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of Civil Rights, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $23,147,000, an increase of $3,127,000 above 
the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and the same amount 
as the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation includes $2,441,000, as 
requested, for the Civil Rights Enterprise System and 
compliance monitoring activities.

          Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration





2007 appropriation....................................          $673,000
2008 budget estimate..................................           739,000
Provided in the bill..................................           709,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................           +36,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................           -30,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Administration, the Committee provides an appropriation of 
$709,000, an increase of $36,000 above the amount available for 
fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of $30,000 below the budget 
request.

        Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments





2007 appropriation....................................      $185,919,000
2008 budget estimate..................................       216,837,000
Provided in the bill..................................       196,616,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................       +10,697,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       -20,221,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental 
Payments, the Committee provides an appropriation of 
$196,616,000, an increase of $10,697,000 above the amount 
available for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of $20,221,000 
below the budget request.
    Included in this amount is $156,590,000 for payments to GSA 
for rent and the Department of Homeland Security for building 
security.
    The following table represents the Committee's specific 
recommendations for this account:

        Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments


                        [In thousands of dollars]

                                    2007     2008 budget     Committee
                                  estimate      request   recommendation

Rental Payments...............     $146,257     $156,590        $156,590
Building Operations...........       39,662       60,247          40,026
                               -----------------------------------------
      Total...................      185,919      216,837         196,616


                     Hazardous Materials Management





2007 appropriation....................................       $11,887,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        12,200,000
Provided in the bill..................................        12,200,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +313,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Hazardous Materials Management, the Committee provides 
an appropriation of $12,200,000, an increase of $313,000 above 
the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and the same amount 
as the budget request.

                      Departmental Administration





2007 appropriation....................................       $23,144,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        24,608,000
Provided in the bill..................................        23,913,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +769,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................          -695,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Departmental Administration, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $23,913,000, an increase of $769,000 above the 
amount available for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of 
$695,000 below the budget request.

     Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations





2007 appropriation....................................        $3,795,000
2008 budget estimate..................................         4,099,000
Provided in the bill..................................         3,936,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +141,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................          -163,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional 
Relations, the Committee provides an appropriation of 
$3,936,000, an increase of $141,000 above the amount available 
for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of $163,000 below the 
budget request.
    Within 30 days from the enactment of this Act, the 
Secretary shall notify the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations on the allocation of these funds by USDA agency, 
along with an explanation for the agency-by-agency distribution 
of the funds.
    The Committee notes that when pay costs are requested in 
the President's budget request, the pay cost estimate includes 
an increase for all FTE's funded through the Congressional 
Relations account. The Committee expects that when the pay 
costs are provided in an appropriations bill, the pay increase 
be distributed to the agencies to cover pay costs.

                        Office of Communications





2007 appropriation....................................        $9,338,000
2008 budget estimate..................................         9,720,000
Provided in the bill..................................         9,720,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +382,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of Communications, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $9,720,000, an increase of $382,000 above the 
amount available for fiscal year 2007 and the same amount as 
the budget request.
    The Committee directs the Office of Communications to 
continue to provide them with copies of open source news 
material made available to USDA officials through the use of 
appropriated funds.

                      Office of Inspector General





2007 appropriation....................................       $80,052,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        83,998,000
Provided in the bill..................................        85,998,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +5,946,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................        +2,000,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of Inspector General, the Committee provides 
an appropriation of $85,998,000, an increase of $5,946,000 
above the amount available for fiscal year 2007, and an 
increase of $2,000,000 above the the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation includes an increase of 
$2,000,000 for additional high priority work on waste, fraud 
and abuse, public health, and program integrity. Of this 
amount, $1,000,000 is for continued work on waste, fraud and 
abuse issues related to crop insurance and farm payments. The 
Committee provides this increase as part of a long-term effort 
to rebuild the resources of the Office of Inspector General 
(OIG).
    The Committee notes that the transfer of personnel, but not 
the funds, to the Homeland Security Office provides additional 
resources for the OIG to carry out its audit and investigative 
functions.
    The Committee greatly values the OIG staff and relies on 
their work extensively. OIG serves as the eyes and ears of the 
public. While the exact methodology of the calculation may be 
subject to dispute, there is no question that OIG's work has 
saved the taxpayers millions of dollars and improved the 
integrity and operation of numerous programs within USDA.
    Audit recommendations not achieving management decision 
within 180 days.--The Committee appreciates receiving for the 
record OIG's list of audit reports where management decisions 
have not been achieved within 180 days. The Committee supports 
OIG in its efforts to reach agreement within 180 days and will 
note its displeasure with those agencies that have failed to 
meet this deadline elsewhere in this report.

                     Office of the General Counsel





2007 appropriation....................................       $39,227,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        41,721,000
Provided in the bill..................................        40,964,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +1,737,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................          -757,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the General Counsel, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $40,964,000, an increase of 
$1,737,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and 
a decrease of $757,000 below the budget request.
    The recommendation includes an increase of $200,000 for 
additional staff to support high priority work.

  Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education and Economics





2007 appropriation....................................          $596,000
2008 budget estimate..................................           654,000
Provided in the bill..................................           626,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................           +30,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................           -28,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the Under Secretary for Research, 
Education, and Economics, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $626,000, an increase of $30,000 above the 
amount available for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of $28,000 
below the budget request.
    The Committee recognizes the importance of the equine 
industry to the state of Tennessee and that it is one of the 
fastest growing sectors of the state's economy. According to a 
2004 USDA survey, assets on equine operations in Tennessee 
totaled approximately $6 billion, an increase of 24 percent 
since 1999. This growth has been accompanied by unparalleled 
demand for trained professionals and research scientists to 
work in the various sectors associated with the equine 
industry. The Committee urges CSREES to work with public 
educational institutions in the state to form partnerships that 
could address the research, educational and outreach needs of 
the industry in the state.

                       Economic Research Service





2007 appropriation....................................       $75,193,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        82,544,000
Provided in the bill..................................        79,282,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +4,089,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................        -3,262,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Economic Research Service, the Committee provides 
an appropriation of $79,282,000, an increase of $4,089,000 
above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease 
of $3,262,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation includes an increase of 
$1,000,000, as requested, to strengthen research and modeling 
capacity in bio-energy and the market impacts associated with 
bio-energy development.
    In addition the Committee recommends an increase of 
$1,500,000 to strengthen and enhance the ERS market analysis 
and outlook program and analysis of global and differentiated 
product markets. The impact of agriculture production in this 
rapidly changing economic environment on rural economic 
development is of great interest and concern to the Committee.
    The Committee recommendation also includes an increase of 
$250,000 to research deployment of broadband service to 
households with no or limited broadband access. The Committee 
held a hearing with the Economic Research Service on the 
current state of rural development and on the sources of rural 
community growth. The importance of communities having 
broadband access was stressed repeatedly during the hearing. 
The Committee expects ERS to study the economic impact of not 
having broadband service on rural communities and their growth, 
community facilities, access to healthcare, and well being.
    The Committee provides $500,000, the same as the fiscal 
year 2007 level, for the continuation of the organic data 
surveys, the compilation of non-survey data on organic 
production and marketing, the merger and reconciliation with 
any new survey information, analysis that reveals patterns, 
similarities and differences from comparisons among organic, 
other differentiated markets, and bulk or homogeneous product 
markets, and the development of policy relevant findings from a 
full portfolio of data and information.

                National Agricultural Statistics Service





2007 appropriation....................................      $147,253,000
2008 budget estimate..................................       167,699,000
Provided in the bill..................................       166,099,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................       +18,846,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................        -1,600,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the National Agricultural Statistics Service, the 
Committee provides an appropriation of $166,099,000, an 
increase of $18,846,000 above the amount available for fiscal 
year 2007 and a decrease of $1,600,000 below the budget 
request.
    Included in this amount is $52,725,000 for the Census of 
Agriculture, an increase of $16,476,000 above the amount 
available for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of $1,600,000 
below the budget request. The Census of Agriculture collects 
and provides comprehensive data on all aspects of the 
agricultural economy. Also included in this amount is 
$113,374,000 for the Agricultural Estimates, an increase of 
$2,370,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and 
the same as the budget request.
    The Committee notes the National Agricultural Statistics 
Service (NASS) has developed additional organic data surveys 
based on the 2002 Census of Agriculture and is expanding 
organic data collection in the 2007 Census of Agriculture. The 
Committee encourages the NASS to conduct in fiscal year 2009 an 
organic follow-on survey to the 2007 Census of Agriculture in 
order to collect more in-depth information on acreage, yield/
production, inventory, production practices, sales and 
expenses, marketing channels and demographics.
    The Committee directs NASS to provide a report by February 
28, 2008, on implementation of Section 7407 of the 2002 Farm 
Bill and a summary of funds requested in the fiscal year 2009 
President's request to implement Section 7407 and to conduct an 
organic follow-on survey.

                     Agricultural Research Service


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




2007 appropriation....................................    $1,128,944,000
2008 budget estimate..................................     1,021,517,000
Provided in the bill..................................     1,076,340,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................       -52,604,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       +54,823,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Salaries and Expenses of the Agricultural Research 
Service, the Committee provides an appropriation of 
$1,076,340,000, a decrease of $52,604,000 below the amount 
available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase of $54,823,000 
above the budget request.
    In addition to pay costs, the Committee provides an 
increase of $10,000,000 for renewable energy resources 
research; $1,750,000 for specialty crop genetic resources 
research; $400,000 for organic production systems research; 
$3,000,000 for food safety research; $3,000,000 for food 
allergen research; $2,000,000 for support of the Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Service mission with respect to animal 
disease; $1,000,000 for support of the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service mission with respect to plant disease; 
$6,500,000 for obesity research; and $5,000,000 for high 
priority research as determined by the Administrator.
    The devastating phenomenon that has affected bees, referred 
to as colony collapse disorder (CCD), is seriously affecting 
the ability of U.S. beekeepers to maintain adequate bee 
supplies that are essential for the production of honey and for 
pollination. Pollination is responsible for an estimated $15 
billion in added crop value, particularly for specialty crops 
such as almonds and other nuts, berries, fruits, and 
vegetables. The Committee understands that the ARS is 
conducting federal research to attempt to identify the cause or 
causes of CCD. The Committee notes that ARS is spending 
approximately $7,674,600 on bee research in fiscal year 2007, 
and strongly encourages the agency to maintain this funding 
level for this vital program in fiscal year 2008.
    Plum Island Animal Disease Center.--The Committee directs 
that none of the funds appropriated to the Agricultural 
Research Service for the Advanced Animal Vaccine Project at the 
Plum Island Animal Disease Center may be directed for any other 
use by the Department of Homeland Security.
    Nutrition research.--The Committee recognizes the 
importance of plant genetic and nutrition research as it 
relates to finding solutions for America's obesity concerns. 
The North Carolina Research Campus in Kannapolis, North 
Carolina, will co-locate two important groups of scientists 
from the University of North Carolina (UNC) School System that 
would combine expertise in agricultural genetics and production 
with nutrition scientists. The Committee encourages the USDA/
ARS to work with the UNC system to establish a public/private 
partnership at the Kannapolis research campus and to look for 
new ways to address current and future health concerns.
    Continuing Programs.--The Committee recognizes the 
importance of ongoing research projects in addressing problems 
faced by the Nation's food and fiber producers. In this regard, 
the Committee directs the Agricultural Research Service to 
continue to fund the following areas of research at the fiscal 
year 2007 funding levels: Aerial Application Research, College 
Station, TX, $584,089; Animal Health Consortium, Peoria, IL, 
$879,430; Animal Vaccines, Greenport, NY, $1,627,698; 
Appalachian Horticulture Research (U of TN/TN State), 
Poplarville, MS, $784,244; Aquaculture Fisheries Center, Pine 
Bluff, AR, $72,552; Aquaculture Initiatives for Mid-Atlantic 
Highlands, Leetown, WV, $543,639; Aquaculture Initiatives, 
Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute, Stuttgart, AR, 
$1,713,477; Aquaculture Research, Aberdeen, ID; $628,843; 
Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi (Rodale Inst.), Wyndmoor, PA, 
$45,176; Arkansas Children's Nutrition Center, Little Rock, AR, 
$584,911; Avian Pneumovirus/Asian Bird Influenza, Athens, GA, 
$291,926; Barley Health Food Benefits, Beltsville, MD, 
$477,009; Bee Research, Weslaco, TX, $244,077; Biomass Crop 
Production, Brookings, SD, $1,213,174; Biomedical Materials in 
Plants, Biotech Foundation, Beltsville, MD, $1,821,298; 
Biomineral Soil Amendments for Control of Nematode, Beltsville, 
MD, $390,101; Bioremediation Research, Beltsville, MD, 
$118,800; Biotechnology Research Development Corporation, 
Peoria, IL, $2,684,737; Bovine Genetics, Beltsville, MD, 
$1,913,866; Broomweed Biological Controls, Albany, CA, 
$444,820; Catfish Genome, Auburn, AL, $878,046; Center for 
Agroforestry, Booneville, AR, $707,706; Central Great Plains 
Research Station, Akron, CO, $534,073; Cereal Crops Research, 
Madison, WI, $902,338; Cereal Disease, St. Paul, MN, $310,971; 
Chronic Diseases of Children, Houston, TX, $496,677; Citrus 
Waste Utilization, Winter Haven, FL, $392,832; Coffee and 
Cocoa, Beltsville, MD, $852,966; Corn Germplasm, Ames, IA, 
$851,946; Corn Rootworm, Ames, IA, $490,354; Cotton Pathology, 
Shafter, CA, $361,805; Crop Production and Food Processing, 
Peoria, IL, $843,393; Cropping Systems Research, Stoneville, 
MS, $848,761; Dairy Genetics, Beltsville, MD, $929,945; Dale 
Bumpers Small Farms Research Center, Booneville, AR, 
$1,935,612; Delta Nutrition Initiative, Little Rock, AR, 
$4,222,502; Diet and Immune Function, Little Rock, AR, 
$234,910; Diet Nutrition and Obesity Research (Pennington), New 
Orleans, LA, $668,570; Dryland Production, Akron, CO, $234,910; 
Endophyte Research, Booneville, AR, $1,066,411; Floriculture 
and Nursery Crops, Beltsville, MD, $2,476,226; Food 
Fermentation Research, Raleigh, NC, $361,805; Food Safety for 
Listeria and E Coli, College Station, TX, $81,356; Food Safety 
for Listeria, E coli, and other Food Pathogens, Beltsville, MD, 
$134,339; Food Safety for Meat and Produce, Beltsville, MD, 
$260,487; Formosan Subterranean Termite, New Orleans, LA, 
$3,743,014; Foundry Sand By-Products Utilization, Beltsville, 
MD, $685,412; Grand Forks Human Nutrition Research Laboratory, 
Grand Forks, ND, $579,739; Grape Genetics, Geneva, NY, 
$628,843; Grape Rootstock, Geneva, NY, $573,689; Grassland Soil 
and Water Research, Temple, TX, $219,665; Greenhouse and 
Hydroponics Research, Wooster, OH, $1,555,357; Greenhouse 
Lettuce Germplasm, Salinas, CA, $223,573; Harry K. Dupree 
National Aquaculture Research Center, Stuttgart, AR, $438,598; 
Hops Research, Corvallis, OR, $464,258; Human Nutrition 
(Equipment), Boston, MA, $98,208; Human Nutrition (Obesity), 
Boston, MA, $730,401; Improved Crop Production Practices, 
Auburn, AL, $1,387,021; Invasive Aquatic Weeds, Ft. Lauderdale, 
FL, $526,755; Invasive Ludwigia Research, Davis, CA, $99,000; 
Johne's Disease, Beltsville, MD, $323,313; Karnal bunt, 
Manhattan, KS, $545,010; Lyme Disease 4 Poster Project, 
Beltsville, MD (National Program), $751,205; Medicinal and 
Bioactive Crops, Washington, DC, $118,800; Mid-West/Mid-South 
Irrigation, Columbia, MO, $692,377; Minor-Use Pesticides (IR-
4), Beltsville, MD, $73,038; Mosquito Trapping Research/West 
Nile Virus, Gainesville, FL, $1,238,482; National Center for 
Agricultural Law, MD, $701,034; National Germplasm Resources 
Program, Beltsville, MD, $145,491; National Germplasm Resources 
System, Beltsville, MD, $121,242; National Germplasm Resources, 
College Station, TX, $242,486; National Nutrition Monitoring 
System, Beltsville, MD, $484,969; National Plant Germplasm 
Program, Aberdeen, ID, $96,994; National Soil Dynamics 
Laboratory, Auburn, AL, $1,110,911; Natural Products for Human 
Health, Beltsville, MD, $237,600; Nematology Research, Tifton, 
GA, $248,376; Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory, 
Mandan, ND, $62,076; Northwest Center for Small Fruits 
Research, Corvallis, OR, $645,962; Oat Virus, West Lafayette, 
IN, $232,786; Obesity Interventions (Nutricore), Beltsville, MD 
(National Program), $90,684; Ogallala Aquifer, Bushland, TX, 
$3,758,197; Olive Fruit Fly, Montpelier, France, $213,386; 
Olive Fruit Fly, Parlier, CA, $301,252; Organic Minor Crop, 
Salinas, CA, $159,036; Peanut Production, Dawson, GA, $74,250; 
Peanut Research, Dawson, GA, $131,799; Peanut Variety, 
Stillwater, OK, $178,200; Pecan Scab Research, Byron, GA, 
$603,409; Phytoestrogen Research, New Orleans, LA, $1,529,821; 
Pierce's Disease/Glassy-Winged Sharpshooter, Parlier and Davis, 
CA, $3,354,863; Pierce's Disease/Glassy-Winged Sharpshooter, 
Ft. Pierce, FL, $465,631; Pineapple Nematode Research, Hilo, 
HI, $283,707; Plant Stress and Water Conservation Lab, Lubbock, 
TX, $1,560,554; Potato Breeding, Prosser, WA, $135,907; Potato 
Diseases, Beltsville, MD, $65,490; Potato Research Enhancement, 
Prosser, WA, $288,057; Poult Enteritis-Mortality Syndrome, 
Athens, GA, $145,903; Poultry Diseases, Athens, GA, $892,344; 
Poultry Diseases, Beltsville, MD, $438,066; Precision 
Agriculture Research, Mandan, ND, $484,969; Quantify basin 
water budget components in the Southwest, Tucson, AZ, $633,265; 
Rainbow Trout, Aberdeen, ID, $1,093,728; Red River Valley 
Agricultural Research Center--Canada Thistle Research, Fargo, 
ND, $263,597; Red River Valley Agricultural Research Center--
Cereal Crops and Sunflower Research, Fargo, ND, $1,725,189; Red 
River Valley Agricultural Research Center--National Sclerotinia 
Initiative, Fargo, ND, $1,723,112; Red River Valley 
Agricultural Research Center--National Wheat and Barley Scab 
Initiative, Fargo, ND, $96,994; Red River Valley Agricultural 
Research Center--Regional Molecular Genotyping, Fargo, ND, 
$175,731; Red River Valley Agricultural Research Center--Wheat 
Quality Research, Fargo, ND, $193,989; Regional Grains 
Genotyping, Raleigh, NC, $692,645; Regional Molecular 
Genotyping, Pullman, WA, $251,020; Residue Management in 
Sugarcane (Sugarcane Research), Houma, LA, $1,193,413; Rice 
research, Stuttgart, AR, $270,790; Seasonal Grazing, Coshocton, 
OH, $99,000; Seismic and Acoustic--Technologies in Soils 
Sedimentation Lab, Oxford, MS, $355,546; Shellfish Genetics 
Research, Newport, OR, $774,966; Sorghum Cold Tolerance, 
Lubbock, TX, $263,597; Sorghum Ergot Research, College Station, 
TX, $71,500; Sorghum Research, Bushland, TX, $483,576; Sorghum 
Research, Little Rock, AR, $145,491; Sorghum Research, Lubbock, 
TX, $974,190; Sorghum Research, Stillwater, OK, $290,982; 
Source Water Protection Initiatives, Columbus, OH, $750,121; 
Southeastern Fruit and Tree Nut Research, Byron, GA, $460,013; 
Southwest Pecan Research, College Station, TX, $232,786; 
Soybean and Nitrogen Fixation, Raleigh, NC, $408,589; Sudden 
Oak Disease, Davis, CA, $317,872; Sugarbeet Research, Kimberly, 
ID, $702,592; Sugarcane Variety Research, Canal Point, FL, 
$1,404,773; Sustainable Feeds, Aberdeen, ID, $99,000; Temperate 
Fruit Flies, Wapato, WA, $36,276; Termite Species in Hawaii, 
Gainesville, FL, $139,104; Tree Fruit Quality Research, 
Wenatchee, WA, $435,461; Tropical Aquaculture Feeds, Hilo, HI, 
$1,541,561; Turfgrass Research, Washington, DC, $476,911; U.S. 
Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center, Hilo, HI, 
$2,402,726; USNA Germplasm/Ornamental Horticulture, Washington, 
DC, $1,655,722; Vaccines and Microbe Control for Fish Health, 
Auburn, AL, $1,061,777; Vectorborne Diseases, Gainesville, FL, 
$219,665; Verticillium Wilt, Salinas, CA, $474,223; 
Viticulture, Corvallis, OR, $349,179; Water Management Research 
Laboratory, Brawley, CA, $339,789; Water Resources Management, 
Tifton, GA, $586,215; Water Use Management Technology, Tifton, 
GA, $340,828; Water Use Reduction, Dawson, GA, $704,635; Weed 
Management Research, Beltsville, MD, $263,597; Wheat Quality 
Research, Manhattan, KS, $420,028; Wheat Quality Research, 
Wooster, OH, $413,654; and Wild Rice, St. Paul, MN, $324,740.

                        BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES




2007 appropriation....................................                 0
2008 budget estimate..................................       $16,000,000
Provided in the bill..................................        64,000,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................       +64,000,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       +48,000,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Agricultural Research Service, Buildings and 
Facilities, the Committee provides an appropriation of 
$64,000,000, an increase of $64,000,000 above the amount 
available in fiscal year 2007, and an increase of $48,000,000 
above the budget request.
    Of the total provided, the Committee includes funding for 
the following: Animal Bioscience Facility, Bozeman, MT, 
$2,690,000; Center for Advanced Viticulture and Tree Crop 
Research, Davis, CA, $2,690,000; Center for Grape Genetics, 
Geneva, NY, $2,690,000; Center of Excellence for Vaccine 
Research, Storrs, CT, $2,690,000; National Center for 
Agricultural Utilization Research, Peoria, IL, $2,690,000; 
Southeastern Poultry Research Laboratory, Athens, GA, 
$4,000,000; U.S. National Arboretum, Washington, DC, 
$1,000,000; University of Toledo Greenhouse and Hydroponic 
Research Complex, Toledo, OH, $2,690,000; US Agricultural 
Research Facility, Knipling-Bushland Laboratory, Kerrville, TX, 
$2,000,000; US Agricultural Research Service Laboratory, Canal 
Point, FL, $750,000; US Agricultural Research Service 
Laboratory, Pullman, WA, $2,690,000; US Agricultural Research 
Service Sugarcane Research Laboratory, Houma, LA, $2,690,000; 
and US Agricultural Research Station, Salinas, CA, $2,690,000.

      Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service

    The budget request for the Cooperative State Research, 
Education and Extension Service (CSREES) programs totals more 
than $1 billion. These programs give support to our 
universities and to rural communities and help address critical 
needs. However, the Committee believes that, given the growth 
in the number of authorized activities funded, there may be 
programs within CSREES that unnecessarily duplicate the work of 
other programs in CSREES and that there must be measures of the 
effectiveness of each program in achieving its goals. While 
CSREES does have a strategic plan, it does not specify how each 
program funded contributes to the agency's goals. The Committee 
requests that the Secretary provide a report by October 1, 
2007, describing in clear, concrete terms, what has been 
achieved in the past and what would be achieved in the future 
for each activity for which the administration sought funding 
in the fiscal year 2008 budget.

                   RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES




2007 appropriation ...................................      $671,419,000
2008 budget estimate..................................       562,518,000
Provided in the bill..................................       671,419,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................             - - -
    2008 budget estimate..............................      +108,901,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Research and Education Activities, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $671,419,000, the same as the 
amount available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase of 
$108,901,000 above the budget request.
    For payments under the Hatch Act, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $195,817,000, a decrease of $126,780,000 below 
the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase of 
$31,387,000 above the budget request.
    For cooperative forestry research, the Committee provides 
an appropriation of $23,318,000, a decrease of $6,690,000 below 
the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase of 
$2,831,000 above the budget request.
    For the Evans-Allen Program, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $42,000,000, an increase of $1,320,000 above 
the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase of 
$3,669,000 above the budget request.
    For the National Research Initiative, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $190,229,000, the same amount as 
available in fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of $66,271,000 
below the budget request. The Committee directs the Secretary 
to provide the requested increase for bioenergy and biobased 
fuels research within the funds provided.
    For Hispanic Education Partnership Grants, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $6,237,000, an increase of 
$297,000 above the amount available in fiscal year 2007 and an 
increase of $649,000 above the budget request.
    For the Veterinary Medical Services Act, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $1,000,000, an increase of 
$505,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and an 
increase of $1,000,000 above the budget request.
    Food safety.--The Committee recognizes the contributions 
that the Food Animal Residue Avoidance Databank (FARAD) has 
made toward ensuring the security of the nation's food supply. 
The Committee is concerned that, although USDA is fully aware 
of the public reliance on the database and its importance in 
maintaining food safety, it has continued to rely on Congress 
to earmark funds for the initiative, neither requesting funding 
in its annual budget submission nor providing another source 
for this information, which relates directly to the 
department's core mission. The Committee directs USDA to report 
to the Committees on Appropriations in the House and Senate 
within 45 days of enactment on its long-term plans to maintain 
the critical function that FARAD has provided in protecting the 
U.S. livestock industry from accidental or deliberate 
contamination.
    The following table reflects the amount provided by the 
Committee:


    The Committee recommendation includes funding for other 
Special Research Grants as follows:


    The Committee recommendation includes funding for other 
Federal Administration grants as follows:


              NATIVE AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS ENDOWMENT FUND




2007 appropriation....................................       $12,000,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        11,880,000
Provided in the bill..................................        11,880,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          -120,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Native American Institutions Endowment Fund, the 
Committee provides $11,880,000, a decrease of $120,000 below 
the amount available in fiscal year 2007 and the same as the 
budget request.

                          EXTENSION ACTIVITIES




2007 appropriation....................................      $450,346,000
2008 budget estimate..................................       431,125,000
Provided in the bill..................................       463,886,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................       +13,540,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       +32,761,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Extension Activities, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $463,886,000, an increase of $13,540,000 above 
the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase of 
$32,761,000 above the budget request.
    The following table reflects the amount provided by the 
Committee:


    The Committee recommendation includes funding for other 
Federal Administration grants as follows:


                         INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES




2007 appropriation....................................       $55,234,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        20,120,000
Provided in the bill..................................        57,244,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +2,010,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       +37,124,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Integrated Activities, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $57,244,000, an increase of $2,010,000 above 
the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase of 
$37,124,000 above the budget request.
    The following table reflects the amount provided by the 
Committee:


              OUTREACH FOR SOCIALLY DISADVANTAGED FARMERS




2007 appropriation....................................        $5,940,000
2008 budget estimate..................................         6,930,000
Provided in the bill..................................         6,930,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +990,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Outreach for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and 
Ranchers Program, the Committee provides an appropriation of 
$6,930,000, an increase of $990,000 above the amount available 
for fiscal year 2007 and the same amount as the budget request.

  Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs





2007 appropriation....................................          $721,000
2008 budget estimate..................................           792,000
Provided in the bill..................................           759,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................           +38,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................           -33,000



                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and 
Regulatory Programs, the Committee provides an appropriation of 
$759,000, an increase of $38,000 above the amount available for 
fiscal year 2007 and $33,000 below the budget request.

               Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




2007 appropriation ...................................      $846,230,000
2008 budget estimate..................................       945,550,000
Provided in the bill..................................       874,643,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................       +28,413,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       -70,907,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 
Salaries and Expenses, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $874,643,000, an increase of $28,413,000 above 
the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2007, and a decrease of 
$70,907,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee is aware of the proposal for user fees in the 
President's budget, but does not recommend establishing such 
fees in annual appropriations acts and will consider such fees 
should they achieve authorization.
    Audit recommendations not achieving management decision 
within 180 days.--The Committee has received from the Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) for the record a list of audit reports 
where management decisions have not been achieved within 180 
days. Included on the list were four audit reports for APHIS, 
with a number of open recommendations. The Committee supports 
OIG in its efforts to reach agreement within 180 days and 
directs APHIS to send the Committee a report by October 1, 2007 
with a plan for reaching management decision on all outstanding 
issues.
    International Activities.--The Committee recommendation 
does not include additional funding for international 
activities. According to APHIS budget documents, in fiscal year 
2006, the agency had 143 staff years and spent almost 
$67,000,000 in over 23 overseas locations. For fiscal year 
2008, APHIS has requested an additional 48 staff years and an 
increase of $8,775,000 for three different programs to 
establish new overseas offices or add to current offices. This 
would bring the budget for international activities to almost 
$76,000,000.
    While the Committee appreciates APHIS' work in helping 
resolve unfair trade barriers, it is not clear what is being 
accomplished by the various APHIS programs with this 
significant amount of money. Along with the budget submission 
for fiscal year 2009, APHIS should submit to the Committee a 
comprehensive strategic plan for its international activities. 
The plan should include details of current activities, 
locations of where they are conducted, number of people, amount 
of money, and results being achieved. In addition, the plan 
should include long-term goals, strategies on how to reach 
these goals, justifications for each program, location, and 
resource requirement (both short-term and long-term).
    The following table reflects the amounts provided by the 
Committee:


    To maintain agency functions the Committee provides the 
requested amount for cost of living requirements.
    Agricultural Quarantine Inspection.--The Committee includes 
an appropriation of $27,531,000 for this program, including 
$1,000,000 for interline activities in Hawaii.
    Animal Health Monitoring and Surveillance.--The Committee 
recommendation includes an increase of $5,600,000 for APHIS for 
activities related to Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia. The 
recommendation continues funding for surveillance activities 
for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy.
    The Committee directs that within the amount provided, 
$1,980,000 is provided for a cooperative agreement with the 
Wisconsin Livestock Identification Consortium. This project 
supports the national plan to establish an animal and livestock 
48-hour traceback system. The Committee also provides $594,000 
for the Farm Animal Identification and Records (FAIR) program. 
Both the Wisconsin consortium and the FAIR project should also 
be eligible to apply for cooperative agreement funding for 
animal identification, which is funded within the NAIS total. 
In addition, the Committee provides $297,000 for a database of 
North Carolina's agriculture industry for rapid response 
capabilities and $542,000 for the New Mexico Syndromic 
Validation Program to support early detection of pathogens in 
animals and prevent their spread. The Committee provides 
$371,000 for Iowa State University's work regarding risk 
assessments of genetically modified agricultural products.
    Animal Identification.--Through fiscal year 2007, a total 
of about $117,800,000 has been provided for a National Animal 
Identification System (NAIS). As of June 30, 2007, APHIS had 
spent $94,400,000 to register about 28 percent of all premises; 
develop and maintain information technology; conduct outreach 
and education initiatives; and pay staff for developing and 
managing NAIS. Of the amount spent, $6,000,000 was made 
available to nonprofit livestock and poultry industry 
organizations to advance the development of NAIS through 
outreach and promotional efforts. In addition, $500,000 was 
spent on a third party study to clarify the costs and benefits 
of animal identification.
    Until August 2005, the Department had stated that program 
data would be held centrally; however, the Secretary announced 
in August that data would be held by private entities that meet 
certain requirements. In addition, after some signals from the 
Secretary that participation would be mandatory, the program is 
now voluntary. The NAIS implementation plan released in the 
spring of 2006 included a timeline that called for the NAIS to 
be operational by 2007 and fully implemented by 2009. However, 
in November 2006, APHIS released a Draft User Guide for NAIS, 
which states that the goal of premises registration is ``to 
establish a complete record of all locations, or premises, in 
the United States that manage or hold livestock and/or 
poultry''. According to USDA, because the program is voluntary 
and the goal can only be reached if producers choose to 
participate, a date is not specified as to when the goal is 
expected to be achieved. In addition, it is not clear if the 
program's original goal of 48-hour animal trace-back is still 
part of the plan.
    The Committee requests a complete and detailed strategic 
plan for the program, including tangible outcomes, measurable 
goals, specific milestones, and necessary resources for the 
entire program. Until the Committee receives this plan, the 
Committee has no justification to continue funding for this 
program and therefore, the Committee recommendation includes no 
new funding.
    Animal and Plant Health Regulatory Enforcement.--In 
addition to pay costs, the Committee recommendation includes an 
increase of $2,042,000 as requested for additional field 
investigators to ensure compliance with border and animal care 
regulations.
    Emergency Management Systems.--In addition to pay costs, 
the Committee recommendation includes an increase of 
$2,000,000, of which $1,000,000 is for animal care in 
emergencies and $1,000,000 for the vaccine stockpile.
    High Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI).--In addition to pay 
costs, the Committee recommendation includes an increase of 
$9,530,000 as requested for domestic and international 
surveillance, including live bird markets and wildlife. Since 
2006, $118,700,000 has been provided to APHIS for HPAI work. 
The Committee requests a report by November 1, 2007, on how 
these funds have been spent.
    Pest Detection.--The Committee recommendation provides 
$26,967,000 for this program. Within that amount, the Committee 
provides $831,000 in funding to continue a cooperative 
agreement with the California County Pest Detection 
Augmentation Program.
    Select Agents.--In addition to pay costs, the Committee 
recommendation includes an increase of $1,000,000 above the 
amount available in fiscal year 2007 to continue addressing 
issues raised by the Office of Inspector General.
    Brucellosis.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$9,043,000 for this program. Within this amount, the Committee 
provides $900,000 for the Greater Yellowstone Interagency 
Brucellosis Committee to eliminate brucellosis from wildlife in 
the Greater Yellowstone area.
    Chronic Wasting Disease.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $16,720,000 for this program. Within this amount, the 
Committee directs that $1,732,000 shall go to the State of 
Wisconsin.
    Cotton Pests.--The Committee recommendation includes the 
consolidation of the Boll Weevil and Pink Bollworm line items 
into a new Cotton Pests program, as requested. The total 
provided is $36,269,000, to address boll weevil, pink bollworm, 
and other cotton pests or diseases. This amount is $20,171,000 
above the budget request.
    Emerging Plant Pests.--The Committee expects the Secretary 
of Agriculture 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, 
but not replacing, the use of CCC funding for emergency 
outbreaks.
    For emerging plant pests, the Committee includes 
$131,245,000, an increase of $32,704,000 above the amount 
available in fiscal year 2007. The Committee provides the 
following increased amounts for eradication and control 
activities: $20,007,000 for Asian Long-horned Beetle; 
$36,709,000 for citrus pests and diseases; $24,175,000 for 
Glassy-winged Sharpshooter/Pierce's Disease; $6,750,000 for 
Potato Cyst Nematode; $30,657,000 for Emerald Ash Borer; 
$6,540,000 for Sudden Oak Death; $2,764,000 for Karnal Bunt; 
and $3,643,000 for other miscellaneous pests and diseases.
    The Committee is concerned about the spread of the Emerald 
Ash Borer. The Committee recommendation more than doubles the 
amount available in 2007 to help States with new outbreaks, 
such as Maryland, and States that are at risk, such as 
Wisconsin. While the Committee is encouraged that APHIS may 
have a new and less costly survey tool to use in 2008, the 
Committee requests that APHIS submits a plan by September 30, 
2007, on how resources available in 2008 will be spent and 
where activities will be conducted.
    The Committee provides $495,000 for hydrilla eradication 
around Lake Gaston in Virginia, and expects APHIS to monitor 
the effectiveness of hydrilla eradication around Smith Mountain 
Lake in Virginia. The Committee also provides $312,000 for 
olive fruit fly activities in California.
    The Committee encourages the Secretary to transfer funds 
from the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) to ensure adequate 
funding is made available for the eradication of potato cyst 
nematode in Idaho.
    Gypsy Moth.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$4,887,000 for this program. The Committee encourages APHIS to 
help eradicate gypsy moth in New Jersey and Maryland.
    Johne's Disease.--The Committee recommendation provides a 
total of $7,706,000, an increase of $4,440,000 above the budget 
request to maintain the current Federal share of total program 
costs.
    Low Pathogen Avian Influenza.--The Committee recommendation 
provides a total of $16,800,000 as requested in the budget. 
This is an increase of $3,079,000 above the amount available in 
fiscal year 2007. Funds are provided for work with the live 
bird marketing system, the commercial industry and National 
Poultry Improvement Plan, and the National Veterinary Services 
Laboratories.
    Within the total, the Committee provides $1,000,000 to the 
State of Connecticut for purposes related to indemnification 
and education for AI vaccinations. The Committee recognizes 
that the traditional response to a low pathogen avian influenza 
(LPAI) outbreak on a poultry farm is the depopulation of the 
affected livestock, and that the USDA provides financial 
assistance through an emergency indemnification program to 
cover the cost of depopulation. The Committee is concerned that 
this approach is costly and ineffective and encourages the 
state to use the funds to study the costs and benefits of 
alternative methods for responding to an outbreak on poultry 
farms, including vaccinations.
    In addition, $12,000,000 for indemnities, which was 
provided in fiscal year 2005, remains available to the program.
    Noxious Weeds.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$1,446,000 for this program. Within this amount, the Committee 
provides $250,000 for the Nez Perce Bio-Control Center and 
$296,000 for the National Biodiversity Conservation Strategy.
    Tuberculosis.--In addition to pay costs, the Committee 
recommendation includes an increase of $1,000,000 above the 
amount available in fiscal year 2007 for work at major 
slaughter plants.
    Wildlife Services Operations.--The Committee recommendation 
provides a total of $76,950,000 as requested in the budget. The 
Committee rejects APHIS's proposal to redirect funds within 
this line item.
    The recommendation assumes the continuation of current cost 
share levels for cooperators. The Committee directs that, other 
than funding for the specific items noted in this report, the 
funds provided in the Wildlife Services Operations line item 
are available for general operations needs.
    The Committee continues the fiscal year 2007 funding level 
for aviation safety. Within the Aviation Safety activities, the 
Committee encourages APHIS to expand research work into what 
can be done to deter birds from the increasing number of wind 
turbine generators around the nation.
    The Committee continues to provide $1,039,000 for wolf 
predation management in Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan.
    The Committee provides funding for the following projects: 
$297,000 for Beaver management in North Carolina; $296,500 for 
crop and aquaculture losses in southeast Missouri; $200,000 for 
predation wildlife services in Virginia; $134,000 for blackbird 
control in Louisiana; $1,300,000 for predator control programs 
in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming; $940,000 for brown tree snake 
management in Guam; $400,000 for Hawaii and Guam operations; 
$990,000 for cormorant control in New York; $200,000 for the 
Cooperative Livestock Protection Program in the State of 
Pennsylvania; $533,000 for beaver management control in 
Mississippi; and $1,818,000 for surveillance in North Dakota.
    The Committee expects APHIS to use program funding to 
appropriately address rabies in Broward County, Florida. The 
Committee expects APHIS to continue monitoring Ohio and 
Michigan for cormorant control. The Committee also expects 
APHIS to continue funding wildlife services in Arkansas at the 
fiscal year 2007 level. The Committee encourages APHIS to help 
resolve the damage and disease issues caused by non-native 
patas and rhesus monkeys in Puerto Rico.
    Animal Welfare.--In addition to pay costs, the Committee 
recommendation includes an increase of $3,170,000 above the 
amount available in fiscal year 2007 as requested. A total of 
$21,126,000 is provided for additional inspectors to further 
improve Animal Welfare Act enforcement. This responds to Animal 
Care's significantly increased workload as a result of rapid 
growth in the number of new licensees and registrants.
    Biotechnology Regulatory Services (BRS).--The Committee is 
concerned with the gaps in oversight by USDA in this area. In 
December 2005, a report from the Office of Inspector General 
(OIG) identified numerous holes in APHIS' regulatory efforts 
for genetically-engineered crops. APHIS should proceed 
carefully to ensure the safe development and use of 
genetically-engineered organisms. The Committee understands 
that the Office of Inspector General is finalizing an audit on 
this program and expects APHIS to address all concerns before 
additional funding can be provided.
    Plant Methods Development Labs.--In addition to pay costs, 
the Committee recommendation includes an increase of $1,000,000 
above the amount available in fiscal year 2007 to support the 
development of detection and control tools to contain and 
eradicate the emerald ash borer.
    Veterinary Biologics.--In addition to pay costs, the 
Committee recommendation includes an increase of $1,413,000 
above the amount available in fiscal year 2007. Of this amount, 
$1,000,000 is for meeting increased demands for veterinary 
biologics applications, and $413,000 is for addressing 
containment requirements and meeting standards related to the 
use of select agents and toxins.
    Veterinary Diagnostics.--In addition to pay costs, the 
Committee recommendation includes an increase of $1,000,000 
above the amount available in fiscal year 2007 for highest 
priority needs.
    Within the total for Veterinary Diagnostics, funding is 
provided for the following projects: $371,000 is provided for 
the Agricultural Biosecurity Center at Kansas State University; 
$100,000 for Agricultural Compliance Laboratory equipment in 
Delaware; and $100,000 for aquaculture monitoring technology at 
Kentucky State University.
    Wildlife Services Methods Development.--In addition to pay 
costs, the Committee recommendation includes an increase of 
$1,625,000 above the amount available in fiscal year 2007 as 
requested for the avian influenza initiative to study the virus 
in swine.
    Within the total provided, $415,000 is included for the 
National Wildlife Research Station in Kingsville, Texas, to 
address emerging infectious disease issues associated with 
wildlife populations.
    The Committee also includes $231,000 to continue the 
cooperative agreement between the Hawaii Agricultural Research 
Center and the National Wildlife Research Center in Hilo.

                        BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES




2007 appropriation....................................        $4,946,000
2008 budget estimate..................................         8,931,000
Provided in the bill..................................         4,946,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................             - - -
    2008 budget estimate..............................        -3,985,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Buildings 
and Facilities, the Committee provides an appropriation of 
$4,946,000, the same as the amount available for fiscal year 
2007 and a decrease of $3,985,000 below the budget request.

                     Agricultural Marketing Service


                           MARKETING SERVICES




2007 appropriation....................................       $74,937,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        74,988,000
Provided in the bill..................................        79,945,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +5,008,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................        +4,957,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Marketing Services of the Agricultural Marketing 
Service, the Committee provides an appropriation of 
$79,945,000, an increase of $5,008,000 above the amount 
available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase of $4,957,000 
above the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation includes $1,897,000 for pay 
costs as requested. The recommendation also includes an 
increase of $1,111,000 as requested for activities relating to 
Organic Standards for a total of $3,180,000. The Committee 
encourages the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) to continue 
working with the Risk Management Agency to collect organic 
price data.
    Country-of-Origin Labeling (COOL).--The Committee 
recommendation includes an increase of $2,000,000 for AMS to 
implement COOL requirements for all covered commodities. The 
Committee understands that AMS is finishing the rule for fish 
and shellfish and is drafting a rule for all other covered 
commodities.
    The Committee notes that AMS recently issued notices re-
opening the comment period for 60 days for the proposed rule on 
all covered commodities, except fish and shellfish, and the 
interim final rule on fish and shellfish covered commodities. 
The Committee directs AMS to meet the following timeline:
    January 17, 2008: Publish re-proposed rule for covered 
commodities with a 60-day comment period.
    July 19, 2008: Publish final rule for all covered 
commodities.
    July 26, 2008: Initiate Congressional review for final rule 
for all covered commodities.
    September 30, 2008: Effective date for final rule for all 
covered commodities.
    A report should be sent to the Committee a week after each 
date outlining the status of each milestone, the reason the 
deadline was not met if appropriate, and a plan on how AMS will 
meet the September 30, 2008 deadline.
    Microbiological Data Program (MDP).--The Committee 
recommendation does not include the proposed termination of 
MDP. It is continued at $6,200,000. In its proposal to 
terminate the program, AMS argued that it was difficult to 
determine the usefulness of the data. The Committee would like 
to work with AMS to implement this program as originally 
intended. A report should be submitted to the Committee by 
November 1, 2007, outlining what AMS thinks are obstacles to 
meeting program goals and solutions to those obstacles. The 
report should also include recommendations on how this program 
can help the Food and Drug Administration in reducing foodborne 
illness incidences.
    Audit-Based Programs.--The Committee is very interested in 
AMS' user-fee funded, voluntary programs that apply Good 
Manufacturing Practices, issued by the Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA), to the management of production and 
handling systems for fresh-cut fruit and vegetables. The 
Committee urges AMS to develop an aggressive marketing plan to 
increase participation in these programs. In addition, it is 
not clear if the audit results are used by FDA to complement 
their food safety activities. The Committee requests a report 
from AMS by January 15, 2008, outlining a marketing campaign to 
enhance participation in these audit-based programs and a plan 
to provide useful information to FDA.
    National Organic Program.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $3,180,000 as requested for the National Organic 
Program. This represents an increase of almost 60 percent over 
the amount available in 2007.
    The Committee continues to provide $1,000,000 in this 
account for the Farmers' Market Promotion Program to make 
grants to eligible entities for projects to establish, expand, 
and promote farmers' markets. The Committee directs that no 
entity should receive more than $75,000 in funding from the 
program, and requests a report on the grants made, including 
the entity, purpose, and location, and the administrative costs 
of the program by March 31, 2008.

                 LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES




2007 limitation.......................................     ($62,211,000)
2008 budget limitation................................      (61,233,000)
Provided in the bill..................................      (61,233,000)
Comparison:
    2007 limitation...................................          -978,000
    2008 budget limitation............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For a Limitation on Administrative Expenses of the 
Agricultural Marketing Service, the Committee provides 
$61,233,000, a decrease of $978,000 below the amount available 
for fiscal year 2007 and the same as the budget request.

          FUNDS FOR STRENGTHENING MARKETS, INCOME, AND SUPPLY

                              (SECTION 32)

                     MARKETING AGREEMENT AND ORDERS




2007 appropriation \1\................................     ($16,425,000)
2008 budget estimate \1\..............................      (16,798,000)
Provided in the bill \1\..............................      (16,798,000)
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +373,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -

\1\ Does not include $20,000,000 in funding for commodity system
  replacement.

    The following table reflects the status of this fund for 
fiscal years 2006 through 2008:


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Marketing Agreements and Orders Program, the 
Committee provides a transfer from section 32 funds of 
$16,798,000, an increase of $373,000 above the amount available 
for fiscal year 2007 and the same amount as the budget request.
    The Committee provides not less than $20,000,000 in funding 
for the Web-based Supply Chain Management System (WBSCM) in 
this account.
    The Committee reiterates its position that administrative 
expenses to support section 32 purposes are expressly allowed, 
and that purchase and maintenance of a computer system 
supporting commodity purchases is an authorized administrative 
expense. Development and maintenance of all previous computer 
systems to support commodity purchase, including the existing 
Processed Commodity Inventory Management System (PCIMS), have 
been funded through section 32.

                   PAYMENTS TO STATES AND POSSESSIONS




2007 appropriation....................................        $1,334,000
2008 budget estimate..................................         1,334,000
Provided in the bill..................................         1,334,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................             - - -
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Payments to States and Possessions, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $1,334,000, the same as the amount 
available for fiscal year 2007, and the same as the budget 
request.

        Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




2007 appropriation....................................       $37,785,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        44,385,000
Provided in the bill..................................        41,115,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +3,330,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................        -3,270,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration 
(GIPSA), the Committee provides $41,115,000, an increase of 
$3,330,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007, and 
a decrease of $3,270,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee is aware of the proposal for user fees in the 
President's budget, but does not recommend establishing such 
fees in annual appropriations acts and will consider such fees 
should they achieve authorization.
    The recommendation includes an increase of $2,000,000 for 
increased enforcement of the Packers and Stockyards Act. GIPSA 
shall submit to the Committee no later than September 30, 2007 
a detailed spending plan for resources available for 
enforcement of the Packers and Stockyards Act, including the 
recommended increase.
    The Committee is seriously concerned about GIPSA's lack of 
oversight in the past on companies it is charged with 
regulating. The Packers and Stockyards (P&S) arm of GIPSA is 
charged with ensuring competitive, fair livestock, meat, and 
poultry markets. However, according to the agency, GIPSA has 
never conducted a financial audit of the large packers and has 
traditionally relied on the companies' auditors to ensure 
reported information is in compliance with the law. In 
addition, following a review of the P&S program in 2005, the 
Office of Inspector General (OIG) found material weaknesses in 
the agency's ability to define and track investigations, plan 
and conduct investigations, and make policy, areas that are 
essential to GIPSA's ability to administer and enforce the P&S 
Act.
    The Committee notes that this latest OIG review cites 
similar concerns raised by a previous OIG review in 1997 and by 
the Government Accountability Office in 2000. The Committee 
urges GIPSA to use all resources available to the agency to 
conduct vigorous government oversight to ensure markets are 
fair and competitive, and businesses are in compliance with the 
law.

        LIMITATION ON INSPECTION AND WEIGHING SERVICES EXPENSES




2007 limitation.......................................     ($42,463,000)
2008 budget limitation................................      (42,463,000)
Provided in the bill..................................      (42,463,000)
Comparison:
    2007 limitation...................................             - - -
    2008 budget limitation............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    The Committee includes a limitation on inspection and 
weighing services expenses of $42,463,000, the same as the 
amount available for fiscal year 2007 and the same as the 
budget request. The bill includes authority to exceed by 10 
percent the limitation on inspection and weighing services with 
notification to the Committees on Appropriations. This allows 
for flexibility if export activities require additional 
supervision and oversight or other uncontrollable factors 
occur.

             Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety





2007 appropriation....................................          $600,000
2008 budget estimate..................................           659,000
Provided in the bill..................................           632,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................           +32,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................           -27,000



                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety, the 
Committee provides an appropriation of $632,000, an increase of 
$32,000 above the amount provided for fiscal year 2007 and a 
decrease of $27,000 below the budget request.

                   Food Safety and Inspection Service





2007 appropriation....................................      $892,136,000
2008 budget estimate..................................       930,120,000
Provided in the bill..................................       930,120,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................       +37,984,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -



                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Food Safety and Inspection Service, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $930,120,000, an increase of 
$37,984,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and 
the same as the budget request.
    The Committee is aware of the proposal for user fees in the 
President's budget, but does not recommend establishing such 
fees in annual appropriations acts and will consider such fees 
should they achieve authorization.
    The Committee provides the full amounts requested related 
to pay costs and employee benefits, a total increase of 
$28,277,000. The Committee provides an increase of $750,000, as 
requested, for data systems for the Food Emergency Response 
Network (FERN), and an increase of $2,500,000 for lab 
equipment, as requested. The Committee provides an increase of 
$6,457,000 for filling vacancies in federal inspector 
positions. The Committee does not approve the proposed 
reduction of $1,976,000 in funding for the public health data 
communication infrastructure (PHDCI). Within the base resources 
provided is at least $5,000,000 for Humane Methods of Slaughter 
enforcement and at least $3,000,000 for the related tracking 
system.
    The Committee does not approve the requested increase of 
$8,433,000 for seven additional FERN labs. While the Committee 
supports the goal of having adequate surge capacity for testing 
food in an emergency, it is troubled by the Department's abrupt 
change this year from its prior insistence that 100 labs were 
needed. It now says 25 labs are needed. This sudden change 
causes the Committee to question the analytical basis of this 
program. The Committee maintains funding for PHCDI and adds 
funding for food safety inspector vacancies. These funds are 
needed to improve the ability of FSIS to address current food 
safety needs.
    Bonuses.--On September 29, 2006, the Under Secretary for 
Food Safety advised the Committee that FSIS might end that 
fiscal year with a balance of only several hundred thousand 
dollars and that it was continuing to cut spending and maintain 
a hiring freeze for non-frontline positions. In light of this, 
the Committee was very disturbed to learn that FSIS spent 
nearly half a million dollars on bonuses for senior FSIS 
officials for that year. At least 13 people received bonuses of 
$17,000 or more, which equates to about half of the top 
starting salary for a slaughter inspector. The Committee 
directs FSIS to use its appropriated funds for activities 
directly in support of the public health to the maximum 
available extent before using them for bonus awards for senior 
officials. The Committee requests a report by January 15, 2008 
on any bonuses awarded to senior officials for fiscal year 
2007.
    Imported poultry products from China.--The Committee has 
included a general provision barring the use of funds in the 
bill to establish or implement any rule allowing poultry 
products from China into the U.S. This would apply to both the 
rule currently in effect that would allow poultry from the U.S. 
to be processed in China and shipped back and to a rule the 
Department is drafting that would allow China to export 
processed poultry products made from animals raised in China.
    Given the recent situation involving pet foods contaminated 
with melamine from China and the repeated, serious food 
contamination incidents within China, it is clear that we 
cannot rely on the Chinese government to ensure its plants 
adhere to U.S. standards in processing. Weak government 
controls in China, coupled with the high incidence of H5N1 in 
that country, provide no assurance that the returned product is 
actually from U.S. poultry or that poultry carrying the H5N1 
virus is not used instead of U.S.-produced poultry. While FSIS 
has said the products would be safe because processing would 
kill any H5N1 viruses, U.S. inspectors will not be standing 
over the shoulders of Chinese workers; in fact, U.S. inspectors 
would visit the Chinese plants at most once a year.
    Risk-based inspection proposal.--The Committee has also 
included the same general provision that was enacted in P.L. 
110-28 to bar FSIS from proceeding with the risk-based 
inspection program it announced on February 22, 2007, until the 
USDA Office of Inspector General (OIG) has provided its 
findings to the Food Safety and Inspection Service and the 
Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
and the Senate on the data used in support of the development 
and design of the riskbased inspection program and FSIS has 
addressed and resolved issues identified by OIG.
    OIG has done 26 audits of FSIS since June 2000 and has 
repeatedly found basic problems with how the agency conducts 
its operations. In just two of its most recent audits of FSIS, 
OIG found that:
     From October 2003 through June 2005, FSIS had 
conducted only eight initial onsite reviews from a total of 28 
State MPI programs.
     A significant number of establishments were 
excluded from Salmonella testing due to ineffective processes 
for identifying establishments eligible for testing.
    Given the many problems found by OIG in the past and FSIS' 
poor track record, the Committee believes the agency must not 
proceed even with a pilot program until there has been a 
thorough review of its proposal by OIG and until all issues 
raised by OIG have been addressed and resolved. The Committee 
includes this language to ensure that there is adequate time 
for OIG to complete its work and for FSIS to resolve any issues 
that are raised.
    The Committee intends FSIS to continue activities related 
to ensuring that the program, if it goes forward, is based on 
scientifically justified information. Those activities should 
include an emphasis on such activities as data collection and 
public meetings and less emphasis on activities such as the 
recent negotiations with the meat inspectors union. The 
Committee recognizes that moving forward with the risk-based 
inspection program without comprehensive and accurate 
scientific data to rank product risk and an unbiased system for 
determining establishment risk would have the potential of 
jeopardizing public health.
    Salmonella Verification Testing Program.--The purpose of 
the Salmonella Verification Testing Program is to provide FSIS 
with information about whether plants are controlling the level 
of Salmonella in their establishments. With this critical 
information, FSIS can then make informed regulatory decisions 
to further reduce pathogen contamination in meat and poultry 
products and improve food safety. After FSIS personnel collect, 
label and culture the Salmonella samples, an APHIS laboratory 
serotypes the positive Salmonella isolates, and then FSIS sends 
the isolates from raw meat and poultry products to an 
Agricultural Research Service Laboratory. After the ARS 
laboratory analyzes the samples further, it stores the 
information in databases. We understand the existing memorandum 
of understanding has lapsed and the agencies have been working 
on a replacement. The Committee directs the Food Safety and 
Inspection Service and the Agricultural Research Service to 
submit a report to the Committee by September 15, 2007 on the 
status of any memorandum of understanding between the two 
agencies regarding the access to the information housed in an 
ARS database on the salmonella isolates that were collected as 
a result of regulatory sampling by the Food Safety and 
Inspection Service.
    Audit recommendations not achieving management decision 
within 180 days.--The Committee has received from the Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) for the record a list of audit reports 
where management decisions have not been achieved within 180 
days. Included on the list were four audit reports for FSIS, 
with multiple open recommendations. The Committee supports OIG 
in its efforts to reach agreement within 180 days and directs 
FSIS to send the Committee a report by October 1, 2007 with a 
plan for reaching management decision on the outstanding 
issues.

                        FARM ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS


    Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural 
                                Services





2007 appropriation....................................          $632,000
2008 budget estimate..................................           695,000
Provided in the bill..................................           666,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................           +34,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................           -29,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign 
Agricultural Services, the Committee provides an appropriation 
of $666,000, an increase of $34,000 above the amount available 
for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of $29,000 below the budget 
request.
    The Committee notes that the budget request did not include 
estimates for implementing a new 2007 Farm Bill. Testimony 
given by the Under Secretary during the hearing on the Farm and 
Foreign Agricultural Service budget stated that ``Once the 
parameters and details of the new bill are known, we will need 
to evaluate the necessary administrative resource requirements 
to implement the legislative programs and policies.'' The 
Committee expects the Department to work with the Committee on 
Agriculture to provide estimates of the implementation costs 
for inclusion in the 2007 Farm Bill. The Committee directs the 
Department to submit reports to the Committees on 
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate, 
and the agriculture authorizing committees of the House of 
Representatives and the Senate, within 30 days of passage of 
the House and Senate 2007 Farm Bills, that detail the necessary 
administrative resource requirements to implement the bills, 
including information technology expenses.
    The Committee notes that the Farm Service Agency (FSA) 
computer system that is responsible for processing payments for 
all Farm Bill programs administered by the Farm Service Agency 
has been experiencing periodic shutdowns due to capacity 
overloads, causing the efficiency of thousands of Farm Service 
Agency county office employees to decrease dramatically. The 
Committee is aware that a plan to upgrade this system is being 
developed by USDA. The Committee directs the Secretary to 
submit to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
Representatives and the Senate, and the agriculture authorizing 
committees of the House of Representatives and the Senate a 
report that has been approved by the Office of Management and 
Budget and reviewed by the Government Accountability Office. 
The report shall include: (1) An enterprise architecture; (2) 
an Information Technology Human Capital Plan; (3) a capital 
investment plan for implementing the enterprise architecture; 
(4) a description of the information technology capital 
planning and investment control process; and (5) a spending 
plan. The spending plan shall include each specific project 
funded, key milestones, all funding sources for each project, 
details of annual and lifecycle costs, and projected savings or 
cost avoidance to be achieved by the project.
    The Committee is extremely disappointed with the 
Department's efforts to date to upgrade the technological 
capabilities of the FSA's Field Office hardware and software 
infrastructure, including digital mapping and crop planning 
analysis. Although Congress has approved significant funding 
for these activities, structural and technological issues 
continue to persist and plague the Agency's operations both at 
the headquarters and field level, and have had a direct impact 
on the quality of service provided to FSA customers. Without an 
appropriate level of upgraded technological support, fully 
executing the planned system-wide reorganization of field 
offices would be premature until the Agency submits the 
requested report on the spending plan.
    The Committee includes statutory language to delay the 
development and implementation of plans to close any local or 
county office of the Farm Service Agency. The Committee held a 
hearing on the Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services budget 
and the message from the Committee was quite clear, Farm 
Service offices should not be closed until the technological 
issues are resolved or at least a plan in place. Also, a new 
Farm Bill will be passed and the impact on the Farm Service 
Agency structure is unknown at this time. The Committee directs 
the Department to take no further action on closure of FSA 
offices until at least six months after the next Farm Bill is 
passed or expiration of the fiscal year 2008 appropriations 
bill.
    The Committee is very concerned about the continued decline 
in the number of small minority owned and operated farms 
nationwide. According to an Economic Research Service (ERS) 
report the percentage of non-white farms owned has dropped from 
15% to 2%. The number of such farms has declined from 845,300 
in 1920 to 43,500 by 1992. Therefore, the Committee directs the 
Department to develop a plan of action to stabilize and expand 
the number of small minority owned and operated farms, 
including a detailed strategy on how the Department plans to 
expand opportunities for these farmers to fully participate in 
all USDA's farm programs, as well as proactive measures to 
reach out to this important resource and report its findings to 
the Committee by March 15, 2008.
    Audit recommendations not achieving management decision 
within 180 days.--The Committee has received from the Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) for the record a list of audit reports 
where management decisions have not been achieved within 180 
days. Included on the list were two audit reports for FSA, with 
multiple open recommendations. The Committee supports OIG in 
its efforts to reach agreement within 180 days and directs FSA 
to send the Committee a report by October 1, 2007 with a plan 
for reaching management decision on the outstanding issues.

                          Farm Service Agency


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES


                                                                              Transfer from
                                                            Appropriation    program accts.     Total, FSA, S&E

2007 appropriation......................................    $1,030,193,000    ($306,859,000)    ($1,337,052,000)
2008 budget estimate....................................     1,228,662,000     (319,517,000)     (1,548,179,000)
Provided in the bill....................................     1,127,409,000     (313,332,000)     (1,440,741,000)
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation..................................       +97,216,000        +6,473,000        +103,689,000
    2008 budget estimate................................      -101,253,000        -6,185,000        -107,438,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Salaries and Expenses of the Farm Service Agency (FSA), 
the Committee provides an appropriation of $1,127,409,000 and 
transfers from other accounts of $313,332,000, for a total 
program level of $1,440,741,000. This is an increase of 
$103,689,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 
and a decrease of $107,438,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation includes an additional 
$29,489,000 for pay costs, $64,200,000 for activities 
previously funded through the Department's CCE account, and 
$10,000,000 for operating expenses.
    The Committee provides to the Administrator of the Farm 
Service Agency, $24,000,000, the same as the fiscal year 2006 
level, for the National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP). 
This amount is in addition to any provided by cooperating funds 
from any other federal, state, or local government funding for 
NAIP.
    The Committee is concerned by the large increases requested 
for FSA salaries and expenses. The FSA salaries and expense 
request represented over eight percent of the total budget 
request. FSA has received about a thirty percent increase in 
the salaries and expense account since fiscal year 2000. 
Included in the requested increase was $77,500,000 to restore 
funding for activities that were funded by balances carried 
over from fiscal year 2006 into fiscal year 2007. Any funds 
that are unspent from prior years and carried forward should 
not be considered as part of the base budget. Agencies were 
expected to manage within the funds provided within the 
Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007.
    The Committee is also concerned by the amount FSA spends on 
IT operations. In fiscal year 2007, FSA is estimated to spend 
over $312,000,000 for the costs of maintaining and operating 
FSA IT systems and the budget request includes an additional 
$28,000,000 in fiscal year 2008. Beginning last autumn, FSA 
began experiencing outages of service for some of its web-based 
applications that support certain farm programs. The 
supplemental included an additional $37,500,000 for network and 
database/application stabilization to address immediate needs 
identified by the Department to address the outage issues. The 
Committee directs the Secretary to provide a monthly update to 
the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
Representatives and the Senate on the progress of this project, 
including usage of funds. In addition, the Committee has been 
hearing for several years that FSA needs to modernize its IT 
system but a modernization plan has yet to be submitted. The 
budget request does not include reference to the FSA 
modernization issues but it is estimated the lifecycle cost is 
in the range of $450,000,000 to $600,000,000 over a 10 year 
time period. The Committee plans to have rigorous oversight of 
the current and projected IT spending within FSA.
    The Committee notes that FSA is also using over $20,000,000 
of the funds provided for NAIP for stabilization of the 
computer network. The Committee is concerned that additional 
resources above the amount identified by the Department for 
stabilization have been diverted from NAIP for this project.
    The Committee expects FSA to improve communication with the 
Risk Management Agency to prevent duplicative payments. The 
Committee directs FSA to use all possible means to avoid 
duplicative payments, including data mining.

                         STATE MEDIATION GRANTS




2007 appropriation....................................        $4,208,000
2008 budget estimate..................................         4,000,000
Provided in the bill..................................         4,000,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          -208,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For State Mediation Grants, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $4,000,000, a decrease of $208,000 below the 
amount available in fiscal year 2007 and the same as the budget 
request.

               GRASSROOTS SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PROGRAM




2007 appropriation....................................        $3,713,000
2008 budget estimate..................................                 0
Provided in the bill..................................         3,713,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................             - - -
    2008 budget estimate..............................        +3,713,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Grassroots Source Water Protection Program, the 
Committee provides an appropriation of $3,713,000, the same as 
the amount available in fiscal year 2007 and an increase of 
$3,713,000 above the budget request.

                        DAIRY INDEMNITY PROGRAM




2007 appropriation....................................          $100,000
2008 budget estimate..................................           100,000
Provided in the bill..................................           100,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................             - - -
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Dairy Indemnity Program, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $100,000, the same as the amount available for 
fiscal year 2007 and the same as the budget request.

           AGRICULTURAL CREDIT INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                         ESTIMATED LOAN LEVELS




2007 loan level.......................................    $3,749,528,000
2008 budget estimate..................................     3,366,812,000
Provided in the bill..................................     3,407,412,000
Comparison:
    2007 loan level...................................      -342,116,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       +40,600,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    Approximate loan levels provided by the Committee for 
fiscal year 2008 for the Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund 
Programs are: $1,423,857,000 for farm ownership loans, of which 
$223,857,000 is for direct loans and $1,200,000,000 is for 
guaranteed loans; $1,879,595,000 for farm operating loans, of 
which $629,595,000 is for direct loans, $250,000,000 is for 
guaranteed subsidized loans, and $1,000,000,000 is for 
guaranteed unsubsidized loans; $3,960,000 for Indian tribe land 
acquisition loans; and $100,000,000 for boll weevil eradication 
loans.
    The following table reflects the loan levels for the 
Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund program account:

                AGRICULTURE CREDIT PROGRAMS--LOAN LEVELS

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      FY 2008        Committee
                                                                  FY 2007  level     estimate       provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farm loan programs:
  Farm ownership:
    Direct......................................................        $207,642        $223,857        $223,857
    Guaranteed..................................................       1,386,000       1,200,000       1,200,000
  Farm operating:
    Direct......................................................         643,500         629,595         629,595
    Unsubsidized guaranteed.....................................       1,138,500       1,000,000       1,000,000
    Subsidized guaranteed.......................................         271,886         250,000         250,000
Indian tribe land acquisition...................................           2,000           3,960           3,960
Boll Weevil Eradication.........................................         100,000          59,400         100,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total, farm loans.........................................      $3,749,528      $3,366,812      $3,407,412
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       ESTIMATED LOAN SUBSIDY AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LEVELS


                                                                 Direct loan    Guaranteed loan   Administrative
                                                                   subsidy          subsidy          expenses

2007 appropriation...........................................      $86,248,000      $63,539,000     $311,229,000
2008 budget estimate.........................................       89,983,000       62,350,000      319,657,000
Provided in the bill.........................................       89,983,000       62,350,000      318,150,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation.......................................       +3,735,000       -1,189,000       +6,921,000
    2008 budget estimate.....................................            - - -            - - -       -1,507,000



    The following table reflects the costs of loan programs 
under credit reform:

                                     AGRICULTURE CREDIT PROGRAMS--SUBSIDIES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 FY 2007           FY 2008          Committee
                                                                estimate          estimate         provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farm loan subsidies:
  Farm ownership:
    Direct................................................            $8,700            $9,962            $9,962
    Guaranteed............................................             8,039             4,800             4,800
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal............................................            16,739            14,762            14,762
                                                           =====================================================
  Farm operating:
    Direct................................................            75,225            79,896            79,896
    Guaranteed unsubsidized...............................            28,121            24,200            24,200
    Guaranteed subsidized.................................            27,379            33,350            33,350
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal............................................           130,725           137,446           137,446
                                                           =====================================================
Indian tribe land acquisition.............................               423               125               125
Boll weevil eradication loans.............................             1,900                 0                 0
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
    Total, Farm loan subsidies............................          $149,787          $152,333          $152,333
                                                           =====================================================
ACIF expenses:
  Salaries and expenses...................................           303,309           311,737           310,230
  Administrative expenses.................................             7,920             7,920             7,920
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
    Total, ACIF expenses..................................          $311,229          $319,657          $318,150
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         Risk Management Agency





2007 appropriation....................................       $76,658,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        79,062,000
Provided in the bill..................................        78,833,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +2,175,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................          -229,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Risk Management Agency, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $78,833,000, an increase of $2,175,000 above 
the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of 
$229,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee has serious concerns about the ability of the 
Risk Management Agency (RMA) to prevent abuses in the crop 
insurance program. Therefore, the Committee has included a 
general provision to allow the use of up to $11,166,000 in 
mandatory funds to improve the Department's ability to police 
the program for waste, fraud and abuse. The funding made 
available would be used for maintaining and upgrading data-
mining and supporting business applications and hardware used 
to detect and deter suspect claims and for the continuation of 
development of the Comprehensive Information and Management 
System (CIMS). CIMS is a joint information management system 
for RMA and the Farm Service Agency that will assist in 
identification of discrepancies between reports on 
participation in both programs to detect potential waste fraud 
and abuse.
    In addition, the Committee has provided an increase of 
$1,000,000 for the USDA Office of Inspector General for 
continued work on waste, fraud and abuse issues related to crop 
insurance and farm payments.
    The Committee believes that the administration must come 
forward with a plan--and the budgetary resources needed--to 
address aggressively the problems of waste, fraud and abuse in 
the crop insurance program that have been identified by OIG and 
the Government Accountability Office. The Committee directs the 
Secretary to submit such a plan to the Committee by February 1, 
2008.
    Audit recommendations not achieving management decision 
within 180 days.--The Committee has received from the Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) for the record a list of audit reports 
where management decisions have not been achieved within 180 
days. Included on the list were three audit reports for RMA, 
with a number of open recommendations. The Committee supports 
OIG in its efforts to reach agreement within 180 days and 
directs RMA to send the Committee a report by October 1, 2007 
with a plan for reaching management decision on the outstanding 
issues.

                              CORPORATIONS


                Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund





2007 appropriation.............................         1 $4,379,256,000
2008 budget estimate...........................          1 4,818,099,000
Provided in the bill...........................          1 4,818,099,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation.........................             +438,843,000
    2008 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 $4,818,099,000 in the President's 
fiscal year 2008 budget request), an increase of $438,843,000 
above the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and the same as 
the budget request.

                   Commodity Credit Corporation Fund


                 REIMBURSEMENT FOR NET REALIZED LOSSES




2007 appropriation.............................        1 $23,098,328,000
2008 budget estimate...........................         1 12,983,053,000
Provided in the bill...........................         1 12,983,053,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation.........................          -10,115,275,000
    2008 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 $12,983,053,000 in 
the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request), a decrease of 
$10,115,275,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 
and the same as the budget request.
    Audit recommendations not achieving management decision 
within 180 days.--The Committee has received from the Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) for the record a list of audit reports 
where management decisions have not been achieved within 180 
days. Included on the list was one audit report for CCC, with 
one open recommendation. The Committee supports OIG in its 
efforts to reach agreement within 180 days and directs CCC to 
send the Committee a report by October 1, 2007 with a plan for 
reaching management decision on the outstanding issue.

                       HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT



2007 limitation................................               $5,000,000
2008 budget estimate...........................                5,000,000
Provided in the bill...........................                5,000,000
Comparison:
    2007 limitation............................                    - - -
    2008 budget estimate.......................                    - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For CCC Hazardous Waste Management, the Committee provides 
a limitation of $5,000,000, the same as the amount available 
for fiscal year 2007 and the same as the budget request.
    The Committee is interested in the status of this program 
and requests a report by January 15, 2008. The report should 
include a history of funding and accomplishments to date, 
future plans, and resources needed. The report should also 
address how this program coordinates and complements the 
Departmental Hazardous Materials Management activities.

              FARM STORAGE FACILITY LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT




2007 appropriation.............................                        0
2008 budget estimate...........................               $4,660,000
Provided in the bill...........................                        0
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation.........................                    - - -
    2008 budget estimate.......................               -4,660,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    The Committee recommendation does not include $4,660,000 
for the Farm Storage Facility Loans program as proposed in the 
President's budget.

                    TITLE II--CONSERVATION PROGRAMS

  Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment




2007 appropriation....................................          $742,000
2008 budget estimate..................................           822,000
Provided in the bill..................................           781,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................           +39,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................           -41,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources 
and Environment, the Committee provides an appropriation of 
$781,000, an increase of $39,000 above the amount available for 
fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of $41,000 below the budget 
request.
    The Committee encourages the Under Secretary to give 
consideration to the following projects requesting financial 
and/or technical assistance under the Natural Resources and 
Environment mission area: White Tanks FRS #3 (AZ); Northeast 
Colorado Surface Water/Groundwater Conservation (CO); Gunnison 
Basin Sage-grouse Habitat Preservation (CO); Gunnison Sage-
grouse Habitat Improvement (CO); Big Cypress Reservation Water 
Conservation project as it contributes to Everglades 
restoration (FL); Watershed Dam Hazard Mitigation (GA); Grass 
Lake Restoration in Kandiyohi County (MN); Great Plains 
Riparian Initiative (MN); Callicoon Creek Watershed (NY); 
Esopus Creek Watershed (NY); Four Farm Conservation Project 
(NY); Moab Area Tamarisk/Russian Olive Control Project (UT); 
Virginia Nutrient Trading Program (VA); Wetlands Restoration 
(VA); Pioneers in Conservation (WA); Columbia Basin Ground 
Water Management (WA); Snoqualmie Watershed Integrated Plan 
(WA); and Bad River Tribe rehabilitation of Wild Rice Beds 
(WI).
    The Committee expects these projects to only be approved 
when such applications are judged to be meritorious when 
subject to established review procedures.

                 Natural Resources Conservation Service


                        CONSERVATION OPERATIONS




2007 appropriation....................................      $763,360,000
2008 budget estimate..................................       801,825,000
Provided in the bill..................................       851,910,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................       +88,550,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       +50,085,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Conservation Operations, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $851,910,000, an increase of $88,550,000 above 
the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase of 
$50,085,000 above the budget request. The Committee 
recommendation includes $20,000,000 for Common Computing 
Environment activities, as requested.
    The Committee recommendation includes not more than 
$110,639,700 for National Headquarters salaries and expenses, 
as requested.
    The Committee provides $27,225,000 for the Grazing Lands 
Conservation Initiative and does not include the reduction 
proposed in the request. The Committee recommendation includes 
$10,840,000 for the Snow Survey and Water Supply Forecasting 
program, $10,779,000 for Plant Materials Centers, and 
$90,713,000 for the Soil Surveys Program. For Conservation 
Technical Assistance, $712,353,000 is provided. The 
recommendation for each program includes pay costs, as 
requested. The amount recommended for Conservation Technical 
Assistance also includes $11,090,000 as requested for the 
development and application of new comprehensive nutrient 
management plans for livestock operations. The Committee 
recommendation includes funding for one American Heritage 
navigator position on the Hudson River.
    State funding allocations.--The Committee is concerned that 
funding allocations to the States are being reduced in 
proportion to Congressional projects funded in the Conservation 
Operations account. The Committee directs the Chief of the 
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), in making the 
fiscal year 2008 Conservation Operations funding allocations to 
the States, to treat Congressional projects as additions to the 
States' funding allocation. The Committee directs the NRCS to 
provide a report to the Committee on Appropriations, not later 
than 45 days after the enactment of this Act, including the 
following: fiscal year 2007 Conservation Operations allocation 
by State, fiscal year 2008 Conservation Operations allocation 
by State, the fiscal year 2008 Congressional projects by State, 
and the total Conservation Operations allocation by State. In 
addition, the Chief of the NRCS is directed to inform the 
Committee immediately about any changes to the formula or 
process by which the base state allocations are made.
    Conservation Technical Assistance Projects.--Funding for 
fiscal year 2007 projects is not continued in fiscal year 2008 
unless specifically mentioned in this report. The following 
funds are directed to be used in cooperative agreements, 
continued with the same cooperator entities as in the fiscal 
year 2007 agreements, except as noted: National Water 
Management Center (AR)--$2,722,500; Mojave Water Agency (CA) 
non-native plant removal--$990,000; Monterey Bay Sanctuary 
(CA)--$594,000; Municipal Water District of Orange County for 
efficient irrigation (CA)--$198,000; Cooperative Agreement with 
Tufts University to improve conservation practices (CT)--
$495,000; Suwannee, Dixie, and Lafayette Counties dairy and 
poultry waste treatment (FL)--$990,000; Cooperative agreement 
with the Green Institute (FL)--$396,000; Georgia Soil and Water 
Conservation Commission Cooperative Agreement (GA)--$3,600,000; 
Community Nutrient Management Facilities for the Lagoon Waste 
Management Demonstration program (GA)--$346,500; Altamaha River 
Basin water quality project (GA)--$99,000; Agricultural 
Development and Resource Conservation (HI)--$891,000; Idaho One 
Plan (ID)--$198,000; The Illinois Buffer Initiative (IL)--
$99,000; Illinois River Basin (IL)--$600,000 through EQIP; 
Hungry Canyons Project (IA)--$1,188,000; The Iowa Buffer 
Initiative (IA)--$99,000; CEMSA with Iowa Soybean Association 
(IA)--$427,680; On-farm Management System Evaluation Network 
(IA)--$247,500; Tallgrass Prairie Center--Native Seed Testing 
Lab (IA)--$441,540; Technical assistance to providing grants to 
Soil Conservation Districts in Kentucky (KY)--$990,000; Best 
Management Practices and Master Farmer Special Research grant 
with Louisiana State University (LA)--$396,000; Bayou Sere 
Drainage Improvements/False River (LA)--$198,000; Union-Lincoln 
Regional Water Supply Initiative (LA)--$123,750; Chesapeake Bay 
activities--$5,940,000; Weed It Now on the Berkshire Taconic 
Landscape (MA)--$66,000; Conservation Planning (MA/WI)--
$594,000; Choctaw County feasibility study for surface 
impoundment (MS)--$247,500; Upper White River Basin Water 
Quality Project (MO)--$426,690; Carson City Waterfall Fire 
Restoration (NV)--$371,250; Pastureland Management/Rotational 
Grazing (NY)--$594,000; Skaneateles and Owasco Lake Watersheds 
(NY)--$321,750; Non-point pollution in Onondaga and Oneida Lake 
Watersheds (NY)--$495,000; Long Island Sound watershed 
initiative (NY)--$198,000; Pace University Land Use Law center 
(NY)--$198,000; Erosion control and stabilization for Hudson 
River shoreline at Village of Tarrytown (NY)--$247,500; 
Watershed Agricultural Council (NY)--$712,800; Technical 
assistance to livestock/poultry industry (NC)--$445,500; Town 
of Cary Swift Creek Watershed Protection and Stream Bank 
Restoration (NC)--$295,020; Maumee Watershed Hydrological Study 
and Flood Mitigation Plan (OH)--$990,000; Range revegetation 
for Fort Hood (TX)--$495,000; Water quality for Tarrant County 
(TX)--$500,000; Water Protection Plan for Hood County (TX)--
$100,000; Washington Fields (UT)--$2,970,000; Natural stream 
restoration (WV)--$792,000; Grazing Lands Conservation 
Initiative (WI)--$940,500; Cooperative agreement with Sand 
County Foundation (WI)--$1,188,000; Accelerated soil mapping 
survey (WY)--$297,000; Audubon at Home Pilot Program--$495,000; 
and Operation Oak Program to restore hardwoods--$396,000.
    Plant Materials Centers.--The Committee provides the fiscal 
year 2007 level for the Hawaii Plant Materials Center.

                     WATERSHED SURVEYS AND PLANNING




2007 appropriation....................................        $6,056,000
2008 budget estimate..................................                 0
Provided in the bill..................................         6,556,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +500,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................        +6,556,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Watershed Surveys and Planning, the Committee provides 
an appropriation of $6,556,000, an increase of $500,000 above 
the amount available in fiscal year 2007, and $6,556,000 above 
the budget request.

               WATERSHED AND FLOOD PREVENTION OPERATIONS




2007 appropriation....................................                 0
2008 budget estimate..................................                 0
Provided in the bill..................................       $37,000,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................       +37,000,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       +37,000,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations, the 
Committee provides an appropriation of $37,000,000, an increase 
of $37,000,000 above the amount available in fiscal year 2007, 
and $37,000,000 above the budget request. Language is included 
which limits the amount spent on technical assistance to not 
more than $18,500,000.
    The Committee is aware of and expects progress to continue 
and/or to provide financial/technical assistance for the next 
phase for the following projects: Pine Barren Watershed 
Extension (AL); Big Slough Watershed (AR); Departee Creek 
Watershed (AR); Four pilot projects in North Florida related to 
dairy and poultry cleanup efforts (FL); Wailuka-Alenaio 
Watershed (HI); Upcountry Maui Watershed (HI); Lower Hamakua 
Ditch Watershed (HI); Soap Creek Watershed (IA); Little Sioux 
Watershed Project (IA); Doyle Creek Watershed (KS); Little 
Otter Creek Watershed Project (MO); Buck and Duck Creek 
Watershed Project (NE); Yadkin County Deep Creek Project (NC); 
Swan Quarter Dike (NC); South Fork of the Licking River 
Watershed Project (OH); McKenzie Canyon Irrigation Pipeline 
Project (OR); Neshaminy Creek Watershed Project, Bucks County 
(PA); Tulpehocken Creek Watershed (PA); Big Creek (Tri-County) 
Watershed Project (TX); Attoyac Bayou site 23-A (TX); and Buena 
Vista Watershed (VA).
    It the understanding of the Committee that the following 
projects will be completed in fiscal year 2007 and that no 
fiscal year 2008 funds are required for: Pigeon Roost Creek, 
Jackson County, Kentucky; and Lower Elk River and Upper Walnut 
North Watersheds, Kansas. The Committee requires immediate 
notification if the projects will be delayed due to technical 
or funding issues.

                    WATERSHED REHABILITATION PROGRAM




2007 appropriation....................................       $31,309,000
2008 budget estimate..................................         5,807,000
Provided in the bill..................................        31,586,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................          +277,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       +25,779,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Watershed Rehabilitation Program, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $31,586,000, an increase of 
$277,000 above the amount available in fiscal year 2007, and an 
increase of $25,779,000 above the budget request.

                 RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT




2007 appropriation....................................       $51,088,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        14,653,000
Provided in the bill..................................        52,370,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +1,282,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       +37,717,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Resource Conservation and Development, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $52,370,000, an increase of 
$1,282,000 above the amount available in fiscal year 2007, and 
an increase of $37,717,000 above the budget request.
    The recommendation includes funding for each of the 375 
Resource Conservation and Development (RC&D) Councils to have a 
Federal coordinator. The budget request proposes to reduce the 
375 coordinators to about 50. This is a concern, considering 
that the coordinator plays an important role in leveraging 
Federal funding to meet local needs.
    The Committee encourages NRCS to continue to work with the 
Councils to develop appropriate measures of effectiveness for 
both conservation and economic development. Therefore future 
budget proposals can be based on the effectiveness and 
performance of the program.
    The Committee expects the NRCS to promptly fill RC&D 
coordinator vacancies, and to allocate funding equitably among 
the existing councils.
    The Committee has included bill language limiting the 
amount that can be spent at national headquarters from this 
account.

                    Healthy Forests Reserve Program





2007 appropriation....................................        $2,476,000
2008 budget estimate..................................         2,476,000
Provided in the bill..................................                 0
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        -2,476,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................        -2,476,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Healthy Forests Reserve Program, the Committee 
provides no funding, a decrease of $2,476,000 below the amount 
available in fiscal year 2007 and the budget request.

                 TITLE III--RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

          Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development




2007 appropriation....................................          $632,000
2008 budget estimate..................................           695,000
Provided in the bill..................................           666,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................           +34,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................           -29,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the Under Secretary for Rural 
Development, the Committee provides an appropriation of 
$666,000, an increase of $34,000 above the amount available for 
fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of $29,000 below the budget 
request.
    The Committee is concerned about the proposal to close 
local Rural Development (RD) offices. Some of these offices are 
located in counties identified by the Economic Research Service 
as persistent poverty counties. The Committee includes a 
general provision that requires the Secretary of Agriculture to 
determine the cost effectiveness and enhancement of program 
delivery prior to closing or relocating any Rural Development 
offices. The Committee directs the Department to provide a 
report, not later than 120 days before the date of the proposed 
closure or relocation, which describes in detail the 
justifications for such closures and relocation.
    While the Committee is providing a significant increase in 
both loans and grants for renewable energy projects it directs 
the Department to review the current project eligibility and 
financial criteria and revise them as appropriate to ensure 
that projects funded will in fact lead to a significant 
reduction in traditional sources of energy, especially fossil 
fuels, and will have sufficient economic return on the 
investment to repay loans and employ proven technologies that 
yield significant environmental benefits. To that end the 
Committee directs the Department to include specific, discrete, 
measurable performance measures in each grant or loan provided 
under this heading for a renewable energy project and to 
subsequently measure the results against those performance 
measures.
    Audit recommendations not achieving management decision 
within 180 days.--The Committee has received from the Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) for the record a list of audit reports 
where management decisions have not been achieved within 180 
days. Included on the list were eleven audit reports for the RD 
mission area, with multiple open recommendations. The Committee 
supports OIG in its efforts to reach agreement within 180 days 
and directs RD to send the Committee a report by October 1, 
2007 with a plan for reaching management decision on the 
outstanding issues.
    The Committee encourages the Under Secretary to give 
consideration to the following projects or organizations 
requesting financial and/or technical assistance, and grants 
and/or loans made available under the Rural Development mission 
area: Marine Service Center in Wrangell (AK); Alaska Berry 
Growers (AK); City of Saint Paul Landfill (AK); City of Saint 
Paul wastewater site (AK); Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal 
Energy Project (AK); Public Building Authority, City of 
Rainsville (AL); Multipurpose Complex, Marion County (AL); 
National Egg Processing Center, Auburn (AL); Rainsville Agri-
Center (AL); Home in Hale, HERO Housing Resource Center (AL); 
Marengo County Economic Development Authority (AL); Eutaw Civic 
Center (AL); Osceola Port Improvements (AR); Batesville 
Wastewater Treatment Plant and Pumping (AR); Northeast Arkansas 
Public Water Authority (AR); Ozark Mountain Regional Public 
Water Authority (AR); SE Washington County water project (AR); 
renovation of existing sewer system for the Town of Garner 
(AR); City of Mayflower water system improvements (AR); Why 
Utilities Water Distribution Lines (AZ); Lukachukai Board of 
Education (AZ); Ganado Chapter Municipal Water Project (AZ); 
Klagetoh Landfill Clean Closure and Open Dump (AZ); Rock Point 
Irrigation Project (AZ); Stanley Memorial Hall (AZ); Cascade 
Shores wastewater treatment plant (CA); Colfax wastewater 
treatment plant (CA); Greenwood Lake water treatment plant 
(CA); Grizzly Flat Fire Station and Community Center (CA); 
Chester Storm Drain Improvements (CA); Renewable Energy 
Development, Imperial Valley (CA); Water and wastewater 
infrastructure, Imperial (CA); Brawley Colonia Water District 
(CA); Sustainable Watershed Treatment, Chula Vista (CA); Second 
Harvest Food Bank Facility Improvement (CA); Alpine County 
Communications Infrastructure (CA); Calaveras County Multi-
Agency Emergency Communication (CA); Produce Safety and Track 
Initiative (CA); San Joaquin County Agricultural Service Center 
(CA); Renewable Energy and Dairy Waste Management (CA); 
International Agri-Center University Extension (CA); Lower Lake 
Historical Museum Structural Retrofit (CA); Clarksburg Fire 
Station (CA); CCVT Energy Conservation Education Program (CA); 
San Jacinto Agriculture Groundwater Exchange (CA); Colorado and 
western states Telemedicine upgrades (CO); Plachy Hall 
Renewable Energy Program (CO); Costilla County Biodiesel Pilot 
Project (CO); Norwood Water Treatment and Distribution System 
(CO); Salt storage shed (CT); Municipal drinking water supply 
(CT); National Resource Center on Rural After School Program 
(CT); Homes in Partnership, Inc. (FL); Florida Public Access 
Enhancement Project (FL); Old Hastings Civic Center Upgrade 
Project (FL); Agriculture Civic Center (FL); National Hispanic 
Rural Communications Initiative (FL); Flood Mitigation Plan for 
the Lake Okeechobee Regional Hospital (FL); County of Cusseta-
Chattahoochee County well and water tank (GA); SW Georgia Rural 
Disaster Demonstration Project (GA); Zion City housing program 
(GA); Polk County wastewater improvements (GA); Chattooga 
County water system upgrade (GA); WellCare Model Project, 
Screven County (GA); Healthy and Natural Animals for Human 
Consumption (GA); Purchase and upgrade America's Second Harvest 
Coastal Georgia, Savannah, Chatham County (GA); Idaho Foodbank 
Facility acquisition and expansion (ID); Southern lllinois 
Regional Social Services, Inc. (IL); Southern Illinois 
Healthcare Foundation (IL); Shawnee Health Services Center 
Dental Program (IL); SIU Belleville Agriculture Research and 
Education Center (IL); Midwest Emergency Department Services 
(IL); lllinois Broadband Map (IL); Miami County Commerce 
Development Initiative (IN); Bio-security computing and 
networking technology at KSU (KS); Chautauqua County Rural 
Water District No. 4 (KS); Clark County Recreational Center 
(KY); Hospice Care Plus Facility (KY); Fleming Country Health 
and Fitness Center (KY); Kentucky PRIDE Program (KY); Green 
County Agriculture Education, Marketing and Exposition Center, 
Greensburg (KY); West Baton Rouge Parish water well and tower 
(LA); East Feliciana Parish Sheriff's office (LA); Lamar Dixon 
Agricultural Community Center (LA); E-Learning Mobile Training 
Center (LA); City of Baton Rouge Downtown Urban Forestry 
Project (LA); Center for Excellence in Organic Agriculture 
(LA); Westbank Hurricane Protection Pump Station (LA); City of 
Hammond Fire Protection (LA); City of Bogalusa, Repair and 
upgrade sewer system (LA); Town of Abita Springs Sewer Plant 
Expansion (LA); Oil City, Water System Capital Improvements 
(LA); Springhill water system improvement (LA); Claiborne 
Parish, Fire House (LA); Mansfield wastewater treatment plant 
(LA); Village of South Mansfield water tank (LA); Town Pump 
Station refurbishing (LA); Company Canal Pump Station (LA); 
Marvin Braud Pumping Station Upgrade (LA); Saltwater Control 
Structure (LA); Regional Electric Cooperative Cape Cod Islands 
(MA); Three County Fairgrounds (MA); Grants to Public 
Broadcasting Systems (ME); Canola Extrusion Processor (ME); 
Downtown Saginaw Farmer's Market (MI); Wakefield Memorial 
Building restoration (MI); Arenac County Sherriff's Office jail 
expansion (MI); Ironwood wastewater infrastructure (MI); City 
of Munising Fire and Police facility (MI); Northern Lakes 
Economic Alliance (MI); Rural to Urban Tourism Links (MO); 
Northwest Missouri Regional Water Projects (MO); LinBrook 
Business Park water well (MS); Ranking Centralized Sanitary 
Sewer System (MS); Canton Multipurpose and Equine Center (MS); 
Seminary water well (MS); Leake Fire Station (MS); Johnston 
Community College Arboretum (NC); Endor Iron Furnace Historic 
restoration (NC); Jonesville Administrative Building and 
Welcome Center (NC); Bladen County Agriculture Industrial Expo 
Center (NC); Swain County School System Expansion (NC); Lab and 
research equipment for the Zeis Science (NC); Yancey County 
Extension and Research Center (NC); Cherokee Center for Applied 
Technology (NC); Graham County Rural Housing Program (NC); 
Bridgeton High School Stadium Preservation (NJ); Food Bank 
Facility and equipment upgrades (NJ); San Miguel County 
Courthouse Renovations (NM); Taos County Administrative/
Judicial Complex (NM); Greater Chimayo Mutual Domestic Water 
Association (NM); Westside Public Safety Building (NM); 
Elevator Construction, Cherry Valley Community Center (NY); 
Town of Guilford building project (NY); Fort Ann Village 
Emergency Center (NY); Columbia County Broadband Development 
Project (NY); Broadband Infrastructure network in Otsego (NY); 
Implementing Healthcare Information Technology (NY); Rural 
College Readiness Distance Education Program (NY); Fairgrounds 
Youth Recreation Complex (NY); Centerville Volunteer Fire 
Company (NY); Vassar Brothers Medical Center (NY); Port of 
Ogdensburg Bulk Handling Equipment (NY); Rural College 
Readiness Distance Education Program (NY); Lyndonville Waste 
Water Treatment Facility (NY); Parish Social Ministry food bank 
(NY); Kinskey Lane Improvements (OH); Mt. Victory Road Water 
Project (OH); Pomeroy Wastewater Collection System Expansion 
(OH); Phase IV Waterline Extension, Washington County (OH); 
Glenmoor/LaCroft sanitary sewer project (OH); Community Access 
Network, Marietta (OH); Rural Business Revitalization project 
(OK); Oaks Mission School Educational Center (OK); Seminole 
State College Foundation Call Center (OK); Oregon Burn Center 
Telephotography Project (OR); City of Coburg wastewater system 
(OR); Brookings Wastewater Infrastructure Replacement (OR); 
Philomath Wastewater System Improvement (OR); Eastern Oregon 
Center for Regional Economic Studies (OR); Happy Canyon Show 
Renovation (OR); Brewery Grade and Highway 30 Intersection 
Project (OR); Deer Creek Center (OR); Smart Planning Fund for 
Water (OR); EMHS Building Design, Phase II (PA); EMTA Vehicle 
Acquisition and Fuel Station capital (PA); Central Library 
Building, Pike County (PA); Pike County Senior Center (PA); The 
Dietrich Theater Expansion Project (PA); The Braddock Biofuels 
Initiative (PA); Three Rivers Wet Weather Demonstration Program 
(PA); Northern Columbia County Cultural Center (PA); Municipal 
maintenance and operational equipment (PA); Mercy Jeannette 
Hospital patient monitoring (PA); Conemaugh Valley Conservancy 
(PA); Cove Area Regional Digester (PA); Sanitary sewer system, 
Arturo Lluberas (PR); Sanitary sewer system for Ollas Hondas, 
Juana Diaz (PR); Las Delicias Water Improvement Project, Ciales 
(PR); Indiera Alta Water Treatment Plant Lares (PR); Aceituna's 
Water Improvement Project, Villalba (PR); Water system 
improvements for Anderson County (SC); Awendaw water system 
(SC); Town of Hollywood water project (SC); Town of Elloree 
water project (SC); Voorhees College Rural and Small Town 
Development (SC); Berkeley County water project (SC); 
Lowcountry Food Bank (SC); Lake View water improvements (SC); 
Darlington/Hartsville wastewater improvements (SC); Alligator 
Sewer Project in Chesterfield County (SC); East Grainger County 
regional wastewater system (TN); Roane County sewer system 
extension (TN); Modular On-dairy Gasification System (TX); Jim 
Hogg County Community Youth Center (TX); Starr County Community 
Youth Center (TX); Wilson County Community Youth Center (TX); 
Frio County Community Youth Center (TX); El Cenizo and Rio 
Bravo county vehicles (TX); Sabine County Water Project (TX); 
La Feria Technology, Training and Recreation Center (TX); Bio-
Diesel Extruder Systems Purchase (TX); Cooperative Development 
Institution Pilot Program (TX); Emergency communication system 
for Weber County (UT); Water Line Upgrade Phase I Project, 
Corinne (UT); Water line upgrade, Phase I (UT); Woody Biomass 
Program (UT); Eastern Shore Broadband Build Out (VA); USVI 
wastewater repairs (VI); Water Reclamation Facility in Battle 
Ground (WA); Future Fields Project (WI); Rural Business 
Enhancement Center (WI); Gene Salem Senior Center (WV); Morgan 
County Courthouse (WV); Braxton-Gilmer Research Technology 
Institute (WV); Benwood Flood Protection Backup Power Supply 
(WV); Taylor County Transfer Tank (WV); McMechen Water Project 
(WV); Claywood Park PSD Red Hills Sewer Extension Project (WV); 
Wadesville Water Project (WV); Connected Technologies (WV); and 
The Thurgood Marshall College Fund. 
    The Committee expects these projects to only be approved 
when such applications are judged to be meritorious when 
subject to established review procedures.

                  RURAL COMMUNITY ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM




2007 appropriation....................................      $737,135,000
2008 budget estimate..................................   \1\ 570,491,000
Provided in the bill..................................       728,807,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        -8,328,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................      +158,316,000

\1\ The budget request included a proposal to fund the Rural Community
  Advancement Program in three separate accounts. For comparative
  purposes, the three accounts are being reflected in this account.

                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Rural Community Advancement Program, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $728,807,000, a decrease of 
$8,328,000 below the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and 
an increase of $158,316,000 above the budget request.
    The budget request included a proposal to fund the three 
funding streams under the Rural Community Advancement Program 
(RCAP) (rural utilities programs, rural community programs, and 
rural business and cooperative development programs) in 
separate accounts, and eliminate the central RCAP account. 
While the Committee is intrigued by this proposal and believes 
it may have merit, enactment of the 2007 Farm Bill may impact 
these programs. Thus, the Committee intends to work with the 
Department to review the proposal carefully within the context 
of the enacted Farm Bill. For comparative purposes, the tables 
reflected within this account will show the three funding 
streams within RCAP.
    The following table provides the Committee's 
recommendations as compared to the budget request:

                                       RURAL COMMUNITY ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM
                                            [in thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 FY 2008           Committee
                                                           FY 2007  level       estimated          provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Community facilities:
Loan levels:
    Community facility direct loans....................         ($297,000)         ($302,414)         ($350,000)
    Community facility guaranteed loans................          (207,900)          (210,000)          (250,000)
Subsidy and grants:
    Community facility direct loans....................             19,038             16,784             19,425
    Community facility guaranteed loans................              7,609              7,728              9,200
    Community facility grants..........................             16,830                  0             23,117
    Other..............................................             54,266                  0              4,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Community facilities subsidy and                97,742             24,512             55,742
           grants......................................
                                                        ========================================================
Utilities:
Loan levels:
    Water and waste direct loans.......................          (990,000)        (1,080,239)        (1,000,000)
    Water and waste guaranteed loans...................           (75,000)           (75,000)           (75,000)
Subsidy and grants:
    Water and waste disposal direct loans..............             98,604            153,394             68,100
    Water and waste disposal grants....................            437,748            344,920            500,000
    Solid waste management grants......................              3,465              3,465              3,465
    Emergency community water assistance grants........             13,692                  0                  0
    Other..............................................              1,485              1,000              1,500
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Utilities subsidy and grants.......            554,994            502,779            573,065
Business:
Loan level:
    Business and industry guaranteed loans.............          (913,962)        (1,000,000)        (1,250,000)
Subsidy and grants:
    Business and industry guaranteed loans.............             39,849             43,200             54,000
    Rural business enterprise grants...................             39,600                  0             40,000
    Rural business opportunity grants..................              2,970                  0              3,000
    Delta regional authority...........................              1,980                  0              3,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Business subsidy and grants........             84,399             43,200            100,000
                                                        ========================================================
Total, program level...................................       ($3,055,898)       ($3,017,039)       ($3,503,082)
Total, subsidy and grants..............................           $737,135           $570,491           $728,807
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following programs are included in bill language for 
the Rural Community Advancement Program: $1,000,000 is for 
grants to nonprofit organizations to finance construction, 
refurbishing, and servicing of individually-owned household 
water well systems in rural areas; $500,000 is for revolving 
funds for financing water and wastewater projects; $24,000,000 
for Federally Recognized Native American Tribes, of which 
$4,000,000 is for community facilities grants to tribal 
colleges, and of which $250,000 is for transportation technical 
assistance; $500,000 for rural transportation technical 
assistance; $3,000,000 is for grants to Mississippi Delta 
Region counties; $25,000,000 is for water and waste disposal 
systems in the Colonias; $18,250,000 is for technical 
assistance for rural water and waste systems, of which 
$5,600,000 is for a rural community assistance program; 
$14,000,000 is for a circuit rider program; and $22,800,000 is 
for empowerment zones and enterprise communities (EZ/EC) and 
communities designated by the Secretary of Agriculture as Rural 
Economic Area Partnership Zones, of which $1,100,000 is for 
rural community programs, of which $13,400,000 is for rural 
utilities programs, and of which $8,300,000 is for the rural 
business and cooperative development programs.
    The Committee provides a program level of $1,250,000,000 
for the guaranteed business and industry guaranteed loan 
program. This is an increase of $250,000,000 above the budget 
request and $336,038,000 above the amount available for fiscal 
year 2007. The budget requested $100,000,000 of this amount to 
fund biomass and renewable energy projects. The Committee 
provides the increased program level to provide $350,000,000 
for biomass and renewable energy projects.
    The Committee is aware the Department has submitted a 2007 
Farm Bill Proposal to address the backlog of Rural Critical 
Access Hospital needs. The Committee supports providing rural 
communities with a strong healthcare infrastructure. The 
Committee notes that since fiscal year 2004, the USDA Community 
Facilities Programs have provided $260 million in loans and 
loan guarantees to support 53 rural critical access hospitals. 
The Committee requests the Department to provide a report, no 
later than January 31, 2008, on the status of community 
facility programs in addressing rural healthcare issues and 
needs, including facilities located in communities impacted by 
weather related disasters.
    The Committee has included a general provision to require 
the water and waste direct loan subsidy rate to be calculated 
using the fiscal year 2007 borrower rates and the fiscal year 
2008 President's economic assumptions. The Committee considered 
the President's budget proposal to lower the borrower interest 
rate for the direct water and waste loan program but the 
Committee needs additional information on the total cost of 
implementing this proposal. The change in the subsidy rate to 
incorporate the proposed borrower interest rate would cost an 
additional $80,000,000 in budget authority. During the Rural 
Development budget hearing, the Committee requested additional 
information on what the additional cost would be for allowing 
prior year loans to also disburse at the proposed borrower 
interest rate. From the data provided, it is estimated that the 
prior year cost of allowing the change in the borrower interest 
rate could cost over $200,000,000. This amount would be a 
modification and funded out of current year budget authority 
unless the proposal was restricted to loans obligated in fiscal 
year 2008. Considering this proposal could cost over 
$280,000,000 to implement and would reduce funding for water 
and waste grants in fiscal year 2008, the Committee is not 
providing the authority to implement the proposed borrower 
interest rate.
    The Committee provides over $66,000,000 to restore funding 
for the Rural Business Enterprise, Rural Business Opportunity, 
and Community Facility Grant programs that were eliminated in 
the President's budget request. These grant programs are 
critical sources of funding for the development of essential 
community facilities, small and emerging private business 
enterprises, and sustainable economic development in rural 
communities. Especially in remote and very poor areas, rural 
communities have few resources to attract new businesses, 
support local small borrowers, and provide health care, public 
safety, or public and community services.

                Rural Development Salaries and Expenses




                                                                                                    Committee
                                                            FY 2007 estimate  FY 2008 estimate     provisions

Appropriations............................................      $161,298,000      $208,194,000      $175,382,000
Transfer from:
    Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account..........       452,927,000       434,890,000       462,521,000
    Rural Development Loan Fund Program Account...........         4,774,000         4,576,000         4,861,000
    Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans            38,623,000        37,009,000        39,405,000
     Program Account......................................
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total, RD Salaries and Expenses.....................      $657,622,000      $684,669,000      $682,169,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Salaries and Expenses of the Rural Development mission 
areas, the Committee provides an appropriation of $175,382,000 
and transfers from other accounts of $506,787,000, for a total 
program level of $682,169,000. This is an increase of 
$24,547,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and 
a decrease of $2,500,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation includes an additional 
$13,767,000 for pay costs, $6,700,000 for activities previously 
funded through the Department's CCE account, and $4,080,000 for 
information technology.

                         Rural Housing Service


              RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                 Administrative
                                                             Loan level       Subsidy level         expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 appropriation.....................................     $5,027,750,000       $228,789,000       $452,927,000
2008 budget estimate...................................      5,087,919,000         35,854,000        434,890,000
Provided in the bill...................................      5,100,000,000        212,163,000        462,521,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation.................................        +72,250,000        -16,626,000         +9,594,000
    2008 budget estimate...............................        +12,081,000       +176,309,000        +27,631,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Rural Housing Insurance Fund program account, the 
Committee provides a loan level of $5,100,000,000, an increase 
of $72,250,000 above the amount available in fiscal year 2007 
and an increase of $12,081,000 above the budget request.
    The following table reflects the loan levels for the Rural 
Housing Insurance Fund program account:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Committee
                                                           FY 2007 level     FY 2008 estimate      provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Housing Insurance Fund Loans
    Single family housing (sec. 502):
        Direct.........................................         $1,129,391                  0         $1,129,391
        Unsubsidized guaranteed........................          3,644,224         $4,848,611          3,716,425
    Housing repair (sec. 504)..........................             34,652             22,855             34,652
    Rental housing (sec. 515)..........................             99,000                  0             99,000
     Multi-family guaranteed (sec. 538)................             99,000            200,000             99,000
    Housing site development (sec. 524)................              5,000              5,045              5,046
    Credit sales of acquired property..................             11,485             11,408             11,486
    Self-help housing land development fund............              4,998                  0              5,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Loan authorization........................         $5,027,750         $5,087,919         $5,100,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    The following table reflects the costs of loan programs 
under credit reform:

       ESTIMATED LOAN SUBSIDY AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LEVELS

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Committee
                                                           FY 2007 level     FY 2008 estimate      provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account (loan
 subsidies):
    Single family housing (sec. 502):
        Direct.........................................           $113,278                  0           $105,824
        Unsubsidized guaranteed........................             42,641            $10,070             44,359
    Housing repair (sec. 504)..........................             10,240              6,461              9,796
    Rental housing (sec. 515)..........................             45,213                  0             42,184
    Multi-family guaranteed (sec. 538).................              7,663             18,800              9,306
    Credit sales of acquired property..................                721                523                552
    Multi-family housing preservation..................              8,910                  0                  0
    Self-help housing land development fund............                123                  0                142
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Loan subsidies............................           $228,789            $35,854           $212,163
                                                        ========================================================
RHIF expenses:
    Administrative expenses............................           $452,927           $434,890           $462,521
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee provides an increase of over $176,000,000 to 
restore funding for the section 502 direct single family 
housing loan program, section 504 direct housing repair loan 
program, section 515 direct rental housing loan program, self-
help housing land development fund loan program, and to reject 
the Administration's proposal to increase the guarantee fee in 
the section 502 guaranteed single family housing loan program. 
These critical housing loan programs were proposed for 
elimination or drastically cut in the President's budget 
request.
    The Committee does not include the general provision that 
was requested in the President's budget, increasing the 
guarantee fee for the section 502 guaranteed single family 
housing loan program.
    The Committee provided funding for the multi-family housing 
preservation program in the Multifamily Housing Revitalization 
Program Account.
    At the time of the subcommittee markup, the Committee has 
not received the proposed legislation for subsidized guaranteed 
loans that the Department stated would replace the section 502 
direct single family housing loan program. The Committee is 
unable to consider a hypothetical proposal to replace this 
critical program that provides housing opportunities to very-
low income individuals and families.

                       RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM




2007 appropriation....................................      $616,020,000
2008 budget estimate..................................       567,000,000
Provided in the bill..................................       533,020,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................       -83,000,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       -33,980,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Rental Assistance Program, the Committee provides a 
program level of $533,020,000, a decrease of $83,000,000 below 
the amount available in fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of 
$33,980,000 below the budget request.
    These funds will be used for renewal of expiring rental 
assistance contracts for a one-year term and provides funding 
for preservation incentives and new construction contracts. In 
addition, this funding level provides a two-month funding 
reserve to cover any unforeseen disruptions for renewing 
contracts. This one-year agreement term will minimize the cost 
fluctuations in this account.
    The Committee notes that the cost to provide renewal of 
expiring rental assistance contracts for a two-year term would 
be $905,700,000, an increase of $338,700,000 above the budget 
request and $297,600,000 over the amount available in fiscal 
year 2007. Since the budget request proposed eliminating many 
critical Rural Development loan and grant programs, the 
Committee was not able to provide the additional resources that 
would be required to maintain the rental assistance program for 
a two-year contract term. Also, the budget request assumed that 
funding for fiscal year 2007 would be based on one-year 
contract renewals but the Revised Continuing Appropriations 
Resolution, 2007, provided funding for two-year contract 
renewals. This change in the fiscal year 2007 assumption 
decreases the funding necessary to provide for one-year 
contract renewals in fiscal year 2008.

                     RURAL HOUSING VOUCHER PROGRAM




2007 appropriation....................................       $15,840,000
2008 budget estimate..................................                 0
Provided in the bill..................................                 0
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................       -15,840,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Rural Housing Voucher Program, the Committee does 
not propose funding as requested in the President's budget. 
Funding for this program is provided in the Multifamily Housing 
Revitalization Program Account.

           MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVITALIZATION PROGRAM ACCOUNT




2007 appropriation....................................                 0
2008 budget estimate..................................       $27,800,000
Provided in the bill..................................        27,800,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................       +27,800,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


    For the Multifamily Housing Revitalization Program Account, 
the Committee provides an appropriation of $27,800,000, an 
increase of $27,800,000 above the amount available in fiscal 
year 2007 and the same amount as the budget request.
    The Committee provides $10,000,000 for the rural housing 
voucher program; $3,000,000 for the preservation of the section 
515 multi-family housing portfolio; and $14,800,000 to continue 
a demonstration program for projects financed under the section 
515 program.
    The Committee proposes to provide authority to the Rural 
Housing Service to administer out of this account the rural 
housing voucher program and the demonstration programs that 
were funded in fiscal year 2007 in the Rural Housing Insurance 
Fund and the Rural Housing Assistance Grant accounts. The 
Committee also includes authority to allow the Secretary to use 
funds made available for the demonstration program to carry out 
a section 515 multi-family rental housing loan restructuring 
program when it becomes authorized, with prior approval of the 
Committee.

                  MUTUAL AND SELF-HELP HOUSING GRANTS




2007 appropriation....................................       $33,660,000
2008 budget estimate..................................         9,500,000
Provided in the bill..................................        40,000,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +6,340,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       +30,500,000



                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Mutual and Self-Help Housing Grants, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $40,000,000, an increase of 
$6,340,000 above the amount available in fiscal year 2007 and 
an increase of $30,500,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee provides over a 400 percent increase for this 
grant program from the President's budget request, which 
proposed to dramatically decrease funding for this program. 
Mutual and self-help housing grants are made available to 
public and private non-profit organizations, local governments 
and tribal organizations to provide technical assistance to 
low- and very-low income families to build their homes through 
the mutual self-help method.

                    RURAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANTS




2007 appropriation....................................       $43,603,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        39,000,000
Provided in the bill..................................        39,000,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        -4,603,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Rural Housing Assistance Grants program, the 
Committee provides an appropriation of $39,000,000, a decrease 
of $4,603,000 below the amount provided in fiscal year 2007 and 
the same amount as the budget request. The appropriated amount 
includes $30,000,000 for very-low income housing repair grants 
and $9,000,000 for rural housing preservation grants.
    The Committee provided funding for the multi-family housing 
demonstration revolving fund in the Multifamily Housing 
Revitalization Program Account. The Committee also did not 
provide funding in this account for the supervisory and 
technical assistance grant program and the compensation for 
construction defects programs since the programs are expected 
to have carryover balances that will be used to fund the 
programs.

                       FARM LABOR PROGRAM ACCOUNT

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Loan level       Subsidy level        Grants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 appropriation........................................       $38,117,000       $18,277,000       $13,860,000
2008 budget estimate......................................        13,520,000         5,849,000         4,000,000
Provided in the bill......................................        50,000,000        21,630,000        25,000,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation....................................       +11,883,000        +3,353,000       +11,140,000
    2008 budget estimate..................................       +36,480,000       +15,781,000       +21,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Farm Labor program account, the Committee provides 
a loan subsidy of $21,630,000, which supports a loan level of 
$50,000,000, an increase of $3,353,000 in loan subsidy and an 
increase of $11,883,000 in loan level above the amount 
available in fiscal year 2007, and an increase of $15,781,000 
in loan subsidy and an increase of $36,480,000 in loan level 
above the amount in the budget request.
    The Committee also provides $25,000,000 in grants, an 
increase of $11,140,000 above the amount available in fiscal 
year 2007 and an increase of $21,000,000 above the budget 
request.
    The Committee provides over a 400 percent increase for the 
Farm Labor Housing loan and grant programs from the President's 
budget request, which proposed to dramatically decrease funding 
for these programs. The Farm Labor Housing loan and grant 
programs provide decent, safe, and sanitary housing for farm 
workers by providing loans to farmers for small, on-farm 
housing or loans and grants for off-farm multi-family 
developments.

                   Rural Business-Cooperative Service


              RURAL DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Administrative
                                                                    Loan level     Subsidy level     expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 appropriation..............................................     $33,870,000     $14,927,000      $4,774,000
2008 budget estimate............................................      33,772,000      14,485,000       4,576,000
Provided in the bill............................................      33,772,000      14,485,000       4,861,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation..........................................         -98,000        -442,000         +87,000
    2008 budget estimate........................................           - - -           - - -        +285,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Rural Development Loan Fund program account, the 
Committee provides for a loan level of $33,772,000, a decrease 
of $98,000 below the amount provided for fiscal year 2007 and 
the same as the budget request.
    For the estimated loan subsidy, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $14,485,000, a decrease of $442,000 below the 
amount available in fiscal year 2007 and the same as the budget 
request.
    The Committee also provides $4,861,000 in administrative 
expenses, an increase of $87,000 above the amount available in 
fiscal year 2007 and an increase of $285,000 above the budget 
request.

            RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Loan level     Subsidy level
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 appropriation......................     $24,752,000  \1\ $5,406,000
2008 budget estimate....................               0               0
Provided in the bill....................               0               0
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation..................     -24,752,000      -5,406,000
    2008 budget estimate................           - - -           - - -
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Offset by a rescission from interest on the cushion of credit
  payments, as authorized by section 313 of the Rural Electrification
  Act of 1936.

                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    The President's budget proposes and the Committee 
recommends to fund this program from mandatory funds instead of 
discretionary funds.

                  RURAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS




2007 appropriation....................................       $26,718,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        20,928,000
Provided in the bill..................................        29,193,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +2,475,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................        +8,265,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Rural Cooperative Development Grants, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $29,193,000, an increase of 
$2,475,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and 
an increase of $8,265,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee provides a total of $29,193,000 for the Rural 
Cooperative Development Grant program, of which: $20,295,000 is 
for the value-added agricultural product market development 
grant program; $2,475,000 is provided for a cooperative 
agreement for the Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural 
Areas (ATTRA) program through a cooperative agreement with the 
National Center for Appropriate Technology; $1,473,000 is for 
cooperatives or associations of cooperatives whose primary 
focus is to provide assistance to small, minority producers; 
$4,455,000 is for cooperative development grants and $495,000 
is for a cooperative research agreement with a qualified 
academic institution.

       RURAL EMPOWERMENT ZONES AND ENTERPRISE COMMUNITIES GRANTS




2007 appropriation....................................       $11,088,000
2008 budget estimate..................................                 0
Provided in the bill..................................        11,088,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................             - - -
    2008 budget estimate..............................       +11,088,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Rural Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities 
Grants, the Committee provides an appropriation of $11,088,000, 
the same as the amount available in fiscal year 2007 and an 
increase of $11,088,000 above the budget request.

                        RENEWABLE ENERGY PROGRAM

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Loan level     Subsidy level      Grants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 appropriation..............................................    $176,512,000     $11,456,000     $11,385,000
2008 budget estimate............................................     195,470,000      18,941,000      15,000,000
Provided in the bill............................................     250,000,000      24,225,000      21,775,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation..........................................     +73,488,000     +12,769,000     +10,390,000
    2008 budget estimate........................................     +54,530,000      +5,284,000      +6,775,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Renewable Energy Program, the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $46,000,000, an increase of $23,159,000 above 
the amount available in fiscal year 2007 and an increase of 
$12,059,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation provides for a renewable 
energy loan level of $250,000,000, an increase of $73,488,000 
above the amount available in fiscal year 2007 and an increase 
of $54,530,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation provides for a renewable 
energy grant level of $21,775,000, an increase of $10,390,000 
above the amount available in fiscal year 2007 and increase of 
$6,775,000 above the budget request.

                        Rural Utilities Service


   RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT


                                                                                                  Administrative
                                                                   Loan level      Subsidy level     expenses

2007 appropriation............................................    $6,079,524,000      $4,304,000     $38,623,000
2008 budget estimate..........................................     4,790,000,000       3,740,000      37,009,000
Provided in the bill..........................................     5,290,000,000       3,740,000      39,405,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation........................................       789,524,000        -564,000        +782,000
    2008 budget estimate......................................      +500,000,000           - - -      +2,396,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    The following table reflects the loan levels for the Rural 
Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program account:

                                             [Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                                                             FY 2007 enacted  FY 2008 estimate     provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan authorizations:
    Electric:
        Direct, 5%........................................           $99,000          $100,000          $100,000
        Direct, Municipal rate............................           100,764                 0                 0
        Direct, FFB.......................................         2,700,000         4,000,000         4,500,000
        Direct, Treasury Rate.............................           990,000                 0                 0
        Guaranteed underwriting...........................         1,500,000                 0                 0
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
            Subtotal......................................         5,389,764         4,100,000         4,600,000
                                                           =====================================================
    Telecommunications:
        Direct, 5%........................................           145,000           145,000           145,000
        Direct, Treasury rate.............................           419,760           250,000           250,000
        Direct, FFB.......................................           125,000           295,000           295,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
            Subtotal......................................           689,760           690,000           690,000
                                                           =====================================================
            Total, Loan authorizations....................        $6,079,524        $4,790,000        $5,290,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       ESTIMATED LOAN SUBSIDY AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LEVELS

                                             [Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                                                             FY 2007 enacted  FY 2008 estimate     provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan subsidies:
    Electric:
        Direct, 5%........................................            $2,119              $120              $120
        Direct, Municipal rate............................             1,522                 0                 0
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
            Subtotal......................................             3,641               120               120
                                                           =====================================================
    Telecommunications:
        Direct, 5%........................................               537               116               116
        Direct, Treasury rate.............................               126             1,675             1,675
        Direct, FFB.......................................                 0             1,829             1,829
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
            Subtotal......................................               663             3,620             3,620
                                                           =====================================================
            Total, Loan subsidies.........................            $4,304            $3,740            $3,740
                                                           =====================================================
    Electric and Telecommunications expenses:
        Administrative expenses...........................           $38,623           $37,009           $39,405
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee has become aware of interest in wind power 
generation and has included increased funding to provide 
additional resources to support this growing renewable energy 
industry.
    The Committee recommendation does not include a program 
level for the guaranteed underwriting loan program since the 
cap set in the authorizing legislation was reached in fiscal 
year 2007 for this loan program.
    The Committee recommendation includes a general provision 
to limit RUS from drafting or implementing any regulation or 
rule insofar as it would require recertification of rural 
status for each electric and telecommunications borrower for 
the Rural Electrification and Telecommunication Loans program. 
The Committee is concerned by the Department's proposal to 
change the long-standing practice of the ``Once Rural, Always 
Rural'' principle until the authorizing committee has the 
opportunity to address the population requirement in the 2007 
Farm Bill.

         DISTANCE LEARNING, TELEMEDICINE AND BROADBAND PROGRAM


                                                                   Loan level      Subsidy level      Grants

2007 appropriation............................................      $495,000,000     $10,643,000     $38,610,000
2008 budget estimate..........................................       300,000,000       6,450,000      24,750,000
Provided in the bill..........................................       300,000,000       6,450,000      52,820,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation........................................      -195,000,000      -4,193,000      14,210,000
    2008 budget estimate......................................             - - -           - - -      28,070,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband 
Program, the Committee provides an appropriation of 
$59,270,000, an increase of $10,017,000 above the amount 
available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase of $28,070,000 
above the budget request, including: $35,000,000 for Distance 
Learning and Telemedicine Grants; $6,450,000 for Broadband 
Telecommunications loan subsidy, which supports a loan level of 
$300,000,000; and $17,820,000 for Broadband Grants.
    The Committee is concerned by the Department's 
administration of the broadband loan program. Since the 
inception of the loan program, the Department has failed to 
obligate available resources to fund viable broadband projects. 
In fiscal year 2007, $10,642,000 was carried over from fiscal 
year 2006, providing a total of $21,285,000 in budget authority 
and a program level of $990,000,000. Historically, the 
Department does not obligate the current year appropriation for 
this program and it is estimated that the $10,643,000 provided 
in fiscal year 2007 will carry over into fiscal year 2008. This 
carry over will provide an additional program level of 
$495,000,000, for a total program level of $795,000,000 in 
fiscal year 2008. The Committee is aware that the Rural 
Utilities Service has published a proposed rule to address 
critical program issues. The Committee believes the 
appropriation for the broadband loan program is sufficient to 
meet expected demand in fiscal year 2008, with the expected 
carryover of prior year funds, and implementation of a new rule 
and the Farm Bill.
    The Committee notes the proposed rule proposes to place 
limitations on service to high density areas which are likely 
to have broadband service. The Committee expects the Department 
to prioritize deployment of Broadband Service to households 
with no or limited broadband access.

                    TITLE IV--DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS

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




2007 appropriation....................................          $597,000
2008 budget estimate..................................           655,000
Provided in the bill..................................           628,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................           +31,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................           -27,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition 
and Consumer Services, the Committee provides an appropriation 
of $628,000, an increase of $31,000 above the amount provided 
in fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of $27,000 below the budget 
request.
    The Committee is aware that the State of Indiana has 
recently entered into a contract to privatize certain 
operations of the Food Stamp Program. It is the Committee's 
understanding that USDA approved the contract in December 2006 
without a clear understanding of the details of the program, 
including its implementation, effect on state employees, daily 
operation of the program or even whether the program complied 
with federal law. In February 2007, USDA sent a letter to the 
State of Indiana requesting additional details about the 
program, with only weeks to go before the initial transfer to 
private contractors of about 70 percent of state employees 
working on the Food Stamp Program; this had already been 
scheduled to occur on March 19, 2007. Therefore, the Committee 
directs the Secretary to perform comprehensive oversight of the 
program. It further directs the Secretary to provide the 
Committee with quarterly reports beginning 30 days after 
passage of this bill on this contract, including the effects on 
enrollment, program access, error rates, and spending on 
administrative expenses. The Committee directs the Secretary to 
be prepared to take appropriate administrative action if 
performance standards as stated in the contract are not met.
    The Committee recognizes that the Food and Nutrition 
Service is promoting the Healthier U.S. School Challenge as 
part of the President's Healthier U.S. Initiative, and the 
Committee commends the USDA for participating in this 
initiative. The Committee notes that there are school-based 
physical education programs, such as PE4Life, that are getting 
positive measurable outcomes in student fitness, as well as 
reduced disciplinary incidences. The Committee strongly 
encourages the Food and Nutrition Service to explore 
collaboration between nutrition programming and wellness, and 
such school-based physical education programs.
    The Committee believes that when a school food service 
authority contracts with a foodservice management company for 
the provision of meals it is important to ensure the integrity 
of accounting functions. The Committee believes that when 
allowing a food service management company to control, either 
directly or indirectly, point-of-sale software as well as the 
editing or reformatting of transactional data used to support 
the federal reimbursement claim, school food service 
authorities must exercise sufficient oversight, as required in 
regulation to protect the integrity of the school meal program. 
The Committee requests the Government Accountability Office to 
provide a report, no later than February 28, 2008, on the 
nature and effectiveness of internal control procedures to 
ensure the accuracy of meal counting and claiming by Food 
Service Management companies under contract to provide meal 
service to School Districts participating in the National 
School Lunch Program. In particular, the Committee is 
interested in such procedures established by Food Service 
Management companies themselves as well as those procedures 
undertaken by School Districts in their oversight and 
monitoring of contractual performance.
    Audit recommendations not achieving management decision 
within 180 days.--The Committee has received from the Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) for the record a list of audit reports 
where management decisions have not been achieved within 180 
days. Included on the list were three audit reports for FNS, 
with several open recommendations. The Committee supports OIG 
in its efforts to reach agreement within 180 days and directs 
FNS to send the Committee a report by October 1, 2007 with a 
plan for reaching management decision on the outstanding 
issues.

                       Food and Nutrition Service


                        CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS



                                                               Direct         Transfer from      Total program
                                                           appropriation        section 32           level

2007 appropriation.....................................     $7,614,523,000     $5,731,073,000    $13,345,596,000
2008 budget estimate...................................      7,592,797,000      6,304,475,000     13,897,272,000
Provided in the bill...................................      7,668,156,000      6,235,057,000     13,903,213,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation.................................        +53,633,000       +503,984,000       +557,617,000
    2008 budget estimate...............................        +75,359,000        -69,418,000         +5,941,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Child Nutrition Programs, the Committee provides a 
total of $13,903,213,000, an increase of $557,617,000 above the 
amount available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase of 
$5,941,000 above the budget request. Of the total amount 
provided, $7,668,156,000 is by direct appropriation and 
$6,235,057,000 is by transfer from Section 32.
    The Committee includes a general provision to expand the 
Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program to all States. The Committee 
provides up to $500,000 for each State, not currently 
authorized, to carry out a program to make free fresh fruits 
and vegetables available to elementary or secondary schools to 
make available to students throughout the school day.
    The Committee also includes a general provision to expand 
the Simplified Summer Food Program to all States.
    The Committee notes the Child Nutrition and WIC 
Reauthorization Act of 2004 authorized a pilot study on 
eliminating the reduced price school meal program, subject to 
the availability of funds. Eliminating reduced price meals 
nationwide by increasing the limit for free meals to 185 
percent of poverty, would cost $3,500,000,000 over five years. 
A pilot study for forecasting the impact of eliminating the 
reduced price school meal program would require a demonstration 
with comparison sites and an evaluation that looked at 
participation increases, rates and how ``error demographics'' 
and administrative challenges were different between the 
demonstration sites and the comparison sites. A pilot program 
would take three years, two years to collect the data and one 
year to evaluate the program. Since the Child Nutrition 
Programs will be reauthorized in 2009, there is not time to 
initiate a pilot program before the program is reauthorized.
    The following table reflects the Committee recommendations 
for the child nutrition programs:

                         [Dollars in thousands]

Child Nutrition Programs:
    School lunch program................................      $8,180,933
    School breakfast program............................       2,389,988
    Child and adult care food program...................       2,288,838
    Summer food service program.........................         310,634
    Special milk program................................          14,618
    State administrative expenses.......................         175,636
    Commodity procurement...............................         508,608
    Team nutrition......................................          15,000
    Food safety education...............................           2,000
    Coordinated review..................................           5,505
    Computer support and processing.....................           9,453
    CACFP training and technical assistance.............           2,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
    Total...............................................     $13,903,213
    The Committee provides $15,000,000 for TEAM nutrition. 
Included in this amount is $6,000,000 for food service training 
grants to States; $3,000,000 for technical assistance 
materials; $800,000 for National Food Service Management 
Institute cooperative agreements; $1,000,000 for print and 
electronic food service resource systems; $1,000,000 to assist 
USDA's Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion in development 
and maintenance of MyPyramid and Dietary Guidelines materials 
in support of nutrition education for Child Nutrition programs 
participants and their families, and $3,200,000 for other 
activities.
    The Committee provides $2,000,000 for Food Safety Education 
and encourages FNS to develop materials to educate children and 
their families on food safety issues including anaphylaxis, to 
conduct further research into the causes of foodborne illness 
in schools using CDC data, support educational initiatives on 
the occurrence of foodborne norovirus outbreaks in schools and 
other food safety education activities.

SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN 
                                 (WIC)




2007 appropriation....................................    $5,204,430,000
2008 budget estimate..................................     5,386,597,000
Provided in the bill..................................     5,620,000,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................      +415,570,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................      +233,403,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, 
Infants, and Children (WIC), the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $5,620,000,000, an increase of $415,570,000 
above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase 
of $233,403,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee notes that since the budget request was 
submitted last February, estimates for participation and food 
costs have increased for fiscal year 2007 and fiscal year 2008, 
increasing the estimate for program needs in fiscal year 2008.
    USDA has reported large upward revisions to its dairy price 
forecasts, and WIC food costs for fiscal year 2007 are starting 
to reflect this increase. Since milk and cheese account for 
about 40 percent of WIC food costs, large fluctuations in dairy 
prices have a significant impact on WIC food costs. The 
increased WIC food costs in fiscal year 2007 reduce the 
projected carry-over into fiscal year 2008. Also, participation 
in fiscal year 2007 has been somewhat higher than originally 
estimated, which increases the estimated participation for 
fiscal year 2008.
    Also, it is currently estimated the WIC program will have 
an unobligated balance in the contingency reserve of about 
$141,069,000, which is $16,069,000 above the original 
appropriation of $125,000,000 provided for the reserve. The 
Committee includes a general provision to rescind the 
$16,069,000 from the contingency fund and includes this amount 
in this record level WIC grant funds.
    The Committee does not include the requested increase of 
$75,000,000 in the contingency fund. The contingency fund is 
intended to support participation should cost or participation 
exceed budget estimates. The Committee instead includes an 
additional $270,570,000 for WIC grants to States to address the 
estimated increases in participation and food costs in fiscal 
year 2008.
    The Committee does not include the provision as requested 
in the President's budget, that caps the national average 
participant grant for nutrition services and administration 
(NSA) grants to States at $14.12 for fiscal year 2008, 
increasing the estimate for NSA funding by $145,000,000.
    Therefore, the recommended funding level, $233,403,000 
above the budget request and $415,570,000 above the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2007, is currently estimated to be 
sufficient to meet program needs. However, the Committee is 
aware that dairy prices are continuing to rise and will 
continue to monitor WIC food costs, participation, and carry-
over funds, and take additional action as necessary to ensure 
that funding provided in fiscal year 2008 is sufficient to 
serve all eligible applicants.
    The recommended funding level includes $15,000,000 for 
continuation of the breastfeeding peer counselor program.
    The Committee provides $30,000,000 for investments in 
management information systems, if the Secretary determines 
that those funds are not needed to maintain caseload and will 
not require use of the contingency fund.
    The Committee does not include language requested by the 
Administration that provides guidance that funds under this 
heading shall not be used for WIC benefits for individuals who 
receive medical assistance or whose family member is a pregnant 
woman or infant who receives assistance, unless their family 
falls below 250 percent of the applicable poverty guidelines.
    Electronic Benefit Transfer.--The Committee recommendation 
includes language to allow funds to be used for WIC electronic 
benefit transfer (EBT) systems and sets the authorized level of 
infrastructure funding at $14,000,000, which includes funding 
to develop EBT systems.

                           FOOD STAMP PROGRAM




2007 appropriation....................................   $38,161,534,000
2008 budget estimate..................................    39,838,223,000
Provided in the bill..................................    39,816,223,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................    +1,654,689,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       -22,000,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Food Stamp Program, the Committee provides 
$39,816,223,000, an increase of $1,654,689,000 above the amount 
available for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of $22,000,000 
below the budget request. The total amount includes 
$3,000,000,000 for a contingency reserve in fiscal year 2008 
and $140,000,000 for the Emergency Food Assistance Program 
(TEFAP).
    The Committee does not include the provision, requested in 
the President's budget, which provides funding as a monthly 
transitional benefit to Commodity Supplemental Food Program 
(CSFP) participants. The Committee does not provide the funding 
requested in the President's budget for the CSFP transitional 
benefit or CSFP outreach grants. The Committee provided an 
appropriation for the CSFP in the Commodity Assistance Program.
    The Committee includes statutory language to exclude 
special pay for military personnel deployed to designated 
combat areas when determining food stamp eligibility.
    The following table reflects the Committee recommendations 
for the food stamp program:

                         [Dollars in thousands]

Food Stamp Program Account:
    Benefits............................................     $31,902,007
    Contingency Reserve.................................       3,000,000
    State Administrative Cost...........................       2,662,000
    Employment & Training...............................         319,570
    Other Program Costs.................................          67,327
    Nutrition Assistance to Puerto Rico.................       1,614,765
    Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations 
      (FDPIR)...........................................          84,650
    The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP).......         140,000
    Associated Activities...............................          25,904
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
    Total...............................................     $39,816,223

    Included in the recommended level for other program costs 
are $2,000,000 to conduct Food Stamp Program modernization and 
innovation projects and $1,000,000 to assist USDA's Center for 
Nutrition Policy and Promotion in the development and 
maintenance of MyPyramid and Dietary Guidelines materials in 
support of nutrition education for the food stamp eligible 
population.
    Included in the recommended level for FDPIR is $34,206,000 
to support additional administration funding in the program to 
address current inequities among tribes in the allocation of 
funds and to address pressing needs to improve warehousing and 
other administrative costs associated with commodity 
distribution.

                      COMMODITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM




2007 appropriation....................................      $177,572,000
2008 budget estimate..................................        70,370,000
Provided in the bill..................................       221,070,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................       +43,498,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................      +150,700,000




                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    The Committee provides an appropriation of $221,070,000 for 
the Commodity Assistance Program, an increase of $43,498,000 
above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase 
of $150,700,000 above the budget request.
    The recommended funding level for the Commodity 
Supplemental Food Program (CSFP) is $150,000,000, an increase 
of $42,798,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 
and an increase of $150,000,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee provides a large increase for the CSFP with 
the expectation that the fiscal year 2007 caseload will be 
maintained. Of this increase, the Committee provides at least 
$3,900,000 to begin funding the five states with USDA approved 
plans. Within the remaining available funds, the Committee 
directs the Department to provide additional caseload in the 
states with existing programs and documented additional needs. 
In assigning additional caseload, the Committee directs the 
Department to give priority to those states which received 
supplemental caseload in the Emergency Supplemental 
Appropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and 
Pandemic Influenza Act of 2006, and continue to have demand for 
supplemental caseload.
    The Committee is aware that of the funding made available 
for CSFP and TEFAP under Division B of P.L. 109-148, Emergency 
Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf 
of Mexico and Pandemic Influenza, 2006, a small amount of 
resources remain available. These resources are in the form of 
both cash balances and commodity inventories. Given that 
disaster-related program operations have ceased, the Committee 
has included a general provision to allow these remaining 
resources, and any subsequent recoveries and collections, to be 
used to support the normal on-going operations of CSFP and 
TEFAP.
    The Committee has included $50,000,000 for administration 
of TEFAP, an increase of $500,000 above the amount available in 
fiscal year 2007 and an increase of $500,000 above the budget 
request. These funds may be used for administration purposes or 
for food costs at the discretion of the States. In addition, 
the Committee recommendation includes language that allows the 
Secretary to transfer up to $10,000,000 of TEFAP commodity 
funding to processing, storage, and distribution costs.
    For the Food Donations Programs the Committee provides an 
appropriation of $1,070,000 for Pacific Island Assistance, the 
same as the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and the same 
as the budget request.
    Farmers' Market Nutrition Program.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $20,000,000 for the Farmers' Market 
Nutrition Program, an increase of $200,000 above the amount 
available for fiscal year 2007 and an increase of $200,000 
above the budget request.
    Seniors Farmers' Market Program.--Public Law 107-171, 
Section 4402, directs mandatory funding for this program from 
funds available to the Commodity Credit Corporation through 
fiscal year 2007. This program is scheduled for reauthorization 
in fiscal year 2008.

                   nutrition programs administration





2007 appropriation....................................      $140,252,000
2008 budget estimate..................................       148,926,000
Provided in the bill..................................       146,926,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +6,674,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................        -2,000,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Nutrition Programs Administration, the Committee has 
provided $146,926,000, an increase of $6,674,000 above the 
amount available for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of 
$2,000,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation includes an increase of 
$2,000,000 to fund initiatives by the Center for Nutrition 
Policy and Promotion to continue development of an evidence-
based system for the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans and 
enhancements to MyPyramid interactive applications and 
information technology services.

            TITLE V--FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS

                      Foreign Agricultural Service

                                             [Dollars in thousands]

                                                                                 Transfer from
                                                                 Appropriation   loan accounts     Total, FAS

2007 appropriation............................................        $156,220        ($5,084)        ($161,304)
2008 budget estimate..........................................         168,209         (4,985)         (173,194)
Provided in the bill..........................................         159,136         (4,985)         (164,121)
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation........................................          +2,916             -99            +2,817
    2008 budget estimate......................................          -9,073           - - -            -9,073


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Foreign Agricultural Service, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $159,136,000 and transfers of 
$4,985,000, for a total salaries and expenses level of 
$164,121,000, an increase of $2,817,000 above the amount 
available for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease of $9,073,000 
below the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation includes $2,817,000 for pay 
costs as requested. Unlike many other agencies, the Foreign 
Agricultural Service received an increase in the Revised 
Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007. The Committee 
believes that there are sufficient resources in base funding 
for overseas operations and reimbursements to the Department of 
State.
    Audit recommendations not achieving management decision 
within 180 days.--The Committee has received from the Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) for the record a list of audit reports 
where management decisions have not been achieved within 180 
days. Included on the list was one audit report for FAS, with 
one open recommendation. The Committee supports OIG in its 
efforts to reach agreement within 180 days and directs FAS to 
send the Committee a report by October 1, 2007 with a plan for 
reaching management decision on the outstanding issue.
    The Committee recommendation includes the fiscal year 2006 
funding level for technical assistance for the promotion of 
specialty crop experts.

                             Public Law 480


                       PROGRAM AND GRANT ACCOUNTS

                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    The following table reflects the loan levels, subsidy 
levels, and administrative costs for all Public Law 480 
programs:

                                             [Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                                                             FY 2007 enacted  FY 2008 estimate     provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Law 480 Program Account:
    Title II--Commodities for disposition abroad:
        Program level.....................................      ($1,214,711)      ($1,219,400)      ($1,219,400)
        Appropriation.....................................         1,214,711         1,219,400         1,219,400
    Salaries and expenses:
        FAS...............................................               166             - - -             - - -
        FSA...............................................             3,207             2,761             2,749
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
          Total, P.L. 480-S&E.............................             3,373             2,761             2,749

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The budget does not request funds for the Public Law 480 
Title I program. The Committee understands that the Department 
estimates that it will have at least $20,000,000 in carryover 
funds available in fiscal year 2008 in the Ocean Freight 
Differential (OFD) account. The Committee has included language 
to permit these carryover funds to be transferred to the Title 
I account if needed. The Committee will continue to monitor the 
availability of carryover and OFD funds and requests the 
Department to advise it immediately if the United States 
Government enters into any agreements under Title I.
    Administration proposal.--The administration proposed 
language under the Public Law 480 Title II account that would 
allow the United States Agency for International Development 
(USAID) to use up to 25 percent of the funds appropriated ``for 
local or regional purchase of food to assist people threatened 
by a food security crisis.'' The Committee has not included 
this language in this bill, but the Committee will consider 
this proposal as part of an overall examination of food aid 
programs. The Committee will hold a hearing this year to 
examine food aid issues and will invite the USAID administrator 
and the Administrator of the Foreign Agricultural Service to 
testify, as well as representatives from international 
organizations and humanitarian groups.

                    CCC EXPORT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                        ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES




2007 appropriation....................................        $5,261,000
2008 budget estimate..................................         5,344,000
Provided in the bill..................................         5,338,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................           +77,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................            -6,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For administrative expenses of the Commodity Credit 
Corporation Export Loans Program Account, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $5,338,000, an increase of $77,000 
above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and a decrease 
of $6,000 below the budget request.

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




2007 appropriation....................................       $99,000,000
2008 budget estimate..................................       100,000,000
Provided in the bill..................................       100,000,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +1,000,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          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 $100,000,000, an increase of $1,000,000 above 
the amount available for fiscal year 2007, and the same as the 
budget request.

TITLE VI--RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT 
                      OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

                      Food and Drug Administration

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Drug, device and
                                                           Appropriation     animal drug user   Total, FDA, S&E
                                                                                   fees
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 appropriation.....................................     $1,569,244,000       $407,530,000     $1,976,774,000
2008 budget estimate...................................      1,635,709,000        416,092,000      2,051,801,000
Provided in the bill...................................      1,697,709,000         13,696,000      1,711,405,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation.................................       +128,465,000       -393,834,000       -265,369,000
    2008 budget estimate...............................        +62,000,000       -402,396,000       -340,396,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    The Committee provides an appropriation of $1,697,709,000 
in budget authority, an increase of $128,465,000 above the 
amount available in fiscal year 2007, and an increase of 
$62,000,000 above the budget request. In addition, the 
Committee makes available $13,696,000 in animal drug user fees 
for total Salaries and Expenses of $1,711,405,000.
    The Committee provides budget authority as follows: 
$466,726,000 for the Center for Food Safety and Applied 
Nutrition (CFSAN) and related field activities of the Office of 
Regulatory Affairs (ORA); $324,438,000 for the Center for Drug 
Evaluation and Research (CDER) and related field activities of 
ORA; $155,073,000 for the Center for Biologics Evaluation and 
Research (CBER) and related field activities of ORA; 
$94,809,000 for the Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) and 
related field activities of ORA; $240,122,000 for the Center 
for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) and related field 
activities of ORA; $36,455,000 for the National Center for 
Toxicological Research (NCTR); $88,577,000 for headquarters and 
the Office of the Commissioner; $131,533,000 for GSA rental 
payments; $59,168,000 for other rent and rent-related 
activities; and $38,808,000 for White Oak consolidation 
expenses.
    In addition, the Committee also provides increases of 
$5,000,000 for the Office of Generic Drugs, $6,250,000 for the 
Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising and Communication, 
$12,750,000 for the Office of Surveillance and Epidemiology, 
$2,000,000 for the Office of Cosmetics and Colors, and 
$35,000,000 for CFSAN. In addition, the Committee provides a 
total of $5,000,000 for the Office of Women's Health.
    The Committee notes that this bill, if enacted, would be 
the second straight large increase in funding provided for FDA. 
If this bill were enacted, FDA would receive an increase of 
almost $231,000,000 in discretionary budget authority compared 
to the 2006 enacted bill.
    The Committee does not make available prescription drug and 
medical device user fees, as the reauthorizations for those 
fees for fiscal year 2008 have not yet been enacted. However, 
if those fees are reauthorized at the levels estimated in the 
budget, total resources for FDA will exceed $2,000,000,000 in 
fiscal year 2008.
    Pending further review, the Committee does not provide any 
funds for closure of FDA laboratory facilities.
    The Committee does not approve the proposed reduction in 
the Food Contact Notification Program. The Committee provides 
funding as requested for the National Center for Food Safety 
and Technology and for New Mexico State University. The 
Committee does not provide funding for the Interstate Shellfish 
Sanitation Commission, the Warehousing Education and Research 
Council, the Natural Products Center, or the Critical Path 
Institute.
    Bill structure.--Although the budget requested a statutory 
``blank check'' that would remove the specified levels of 
funding for each center and other activities in the bill, the 
Committee believes the agency needs more budget controls, not 
fewer. Therefore, it has maintained the usual bill language 
structure.
    Food safety.--The Committee believes that FDA is failing to 
do what is needed to ensure the safety of our food supply.
    The Committee believes that additional budgetary resources 
must be tied to a sound management plan that represents a 
systemic approach to addressing the shortfalls of the 
inspection of our domestic and imported foods and that has the 
support of the Administration.
    There have been mixed signs as to whether FDA is going to 
produce such a plan. To ensure that it does, the Committee 
directs FDA to develop a performance plan that establishes 
measurable benchmarks for concrete improvements in the 
performance of its food safety mission.
    The plan must set forth clear, definitive goals over a 
multiyear period to comprehensively overhaul FDA's food safety 
operations, covering both domestic and imported foods. The plan 
must include a detailed description of any organizational, 
managerial, statutory and regulatory changes necessary to 
achieve them, as well as an assessment of the budgetary 
resources needed. If statutory changes are proposed, the plan 
must include the statutory language. The plan must be approved 
by the Office of Management and Budget.
    The Committee suggests that enforceable standards for food 
safety, HAACP-like systems, and a process for reviewing the 
food safety systems in countries that export food to the United 
States should be considered as key parts of the building blocks 
of a stronger food safety system. These are proposals that are 
not dissimilar to measures FDA has proposed in the past or may 
be considering currently.
    The Committee provides $28,000,000 to be available on July 
1, 2008 for implementation of the plan. In order to have 
sufficient time to evaluate the plan, the Committee directs 
that it be transmitted concurrently with the fiscal year 2009 
budget.
    While there are clearly shortfalls in FDA's approach to the 
safety of the other products it regulates, the Committee 
believes that it is appropriate to begin the process of 
overhauling FDA with the foods program, since the pending 
reauthorizations for the drug and medical device programs may 
make fundamental changes in those areas.
    The Committee provides an additional $7,000,000 for 
increased activities to protect the safety of imported foods.
    Field activities.--The Committee believes that it must hold 
FDA accountable for its performance of its field operations, 
which are the most basic activities FDA performs to protect the 
public health. Therefore, within the sums provided in this 
bill, the Committee provides $527,567,000 in budget authority 
for ORA for field activities by center as follows: CFSAN, 
$319,138,000; CDER, $81,488,000; CBER, $29,310,000; CVM, 
$35,774,000; and CDRH, $61,857,000. The Committee directs FDA 
to maintain at least these levels for field activities and to 
notify the Committee if it proposes to reduce any of them.
    Direct to consumer advertising user fees.--In its 
recommendations for reauthorization of the Prescription Drug 
User Fee Act, the Administration has proposed that FDA be 
permitted to charge drug companies a user fee for advisory 
reviews of their prescription drug direct-to-consumer (DTC) 
television ads. FDA's justification was, in part, that ``these 
television advertisements are highly visible and if done well, 
will reflect positively on the [drug] industry as a whole...''
    Positive impacts on an industry should not be any part of 
FDA's considerations. DTC ads are designed to affect consumers 
and FDA's reviews of them should protect their interests. 
Having drug companies pay for the review of such ads--and 
having reviewers' salaries dependent on drug company fees--will 
further undermine the public's confidence in FDA.
    The Committee believes the Administration's proposal to 
establish a user fee for review of direct-to-consumer (DTC) 
advertising is ill-conceived. The Committee provides an 
increase of $6,250,000 for review of direct to consumer 
advertisements, the amount that FDA estimates would be raised 
by the proposed user fee. Should the DTC user fee proposal be 
authorized, the Committee will not approve an appropriation to 
make the funds collected available.
    Postmarketing studies.--In June 2006, the Office of 
Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human 
Services (OIG) issued a report entitled ``FDA's Monitoring of 
Postmarketing Study Commitments.'' OIG looked at FDA's database 
of postmarketing study commitments (PMCs) for drugs approved 
between 1990 and 2004 and concluded that ``FDA cannot readily 
identify whether or how timely PMCs are progressing toward 
completion'' because many reports were missing or incomplete or 
contained information that was of little use to FDA. Many 
reports included none of the milestones towards completion 
required by the agency's regulations or only partial 
information.
    The Committee is very concerned that FDA rejected OIG's 
recommendation that it tell companies to provide additional 
useful information in the annual status reports they submit to 
FDA, such as milestones to monitor progress in completing 
studies, merely because FDA would be required to change its 
regulations to do so.
    The Committee cannot accept FDA's reason for not 
implementing this recommendation and directs FDA to submit a 
report by November 1, 2007 explaining why it believes it should 
not comply with this recommendation.
    Office of Women's Health.--The Committee believes that the 
work of the Office of Women's Health at FDA is critical to 
ensuring that the wide ranging policies and actions at the 
agency reflect the health needs of women, and include research, 
outreach, and analyses of data by demographic variables, 
including race and ethnicity. The Committee provides $5,000,000 
for the Office of Women's Health. The Committee requests 
quarterly reports on the expenditures and staffing levels of 
the Office to ensure that the resources provided are used 
exclusively for that Office.
    Ketek.--The Committee is very concerned about criticisms of 
FDA's handling of clinical safety issues involving the drug 
Ketek.
    FDA told the Committee that it ``will use the knowledge we 
have learned from the Ketek investigation to look at future 
studies and sites that we target for data audits.''
    The Committee requests a report from the agency by October 
1, 2007, describing what FDA learned from the Ketek 
investigation.
    Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy.--The Committee remains 
concerned over the prolonged delay in the issuance of a new, 
upgraded rule regarding the prohibition of additional specified 
risk materials from ruminant and non-ruminant animal feed. 
Within 60 days of enactment of this Act, FDA is directed to 
submit a report to the Committee detailing the obstacles to the 
completion of this report, as well as any legislative activity 
that would assist in the resolution of this issue.
    Diacetyl.--The Committee is concerned about potential 
health hazards posed by exposure to the chemical diacetyl, a 
butter flavoring agent used in microwave popcorns and other 
foods. Although, FDA codified diacetyl as ``generally regarded 
as safe'' (GRAS) in 1983, several recent investigations by the 
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) 
found diacetyl to have caused a rare and fatal lung disease 
(bronchiolitis obliterans). The Committee believes that the 
more recent safety information by NIOSH comprises compelling 
scientific evidence that diacetyl may not only pose a real 
threat to exposed workers, but also raises the possibility of 
harm to consumers of microwave popcorn. The Committee believes 
that this matter warrants reconsideration by the FDA of the 
GRAS status of diacetyl, but at minimum, the FDA should conduct 
further studies to examine the safety of diacetyl and the 
relationship between exposure to the chemical and consumption 
of food products containing the butter flavoring. The Committee 
directs that FDA submit a report on its plan to research this 
issue further to the House Committee on Appropriations within 
90 days of enactment.
    Microbial Resistance.--In 2003, FDA released guidance for 
industry that outlines a comprehensive, evidence-based approach 
to preventing antimicrobial resistance in humans that may 
result from the use of antimicrobial drugs in animals. However, 
the Committee is concerned that the guidance document does not 
assign enough weight to the impact of microbial resistance to 
drugs that are highly important to human medicine but are not 
used to treat foodborne illnesses. Transferred resistance from 
antimicrobials used in animals produced for food can also 
render critically important human antibiotics ineffective, 
including those used to treat foodborne illnesses. The 
Committee is concerned that simply satisfying the requirements 
of the guidance document is not adequate to protect human 
health. Therefore, the Committee directs FDA to reevaluate the 
basis on which it makes such decisions and to provide a report 
to the Committee by November 1, 2007.
    FDA enforcement.--FDA recently issued an import alert about 
certain types of farm-raised fish from China. The Committee is 
dismayed that it took the agency so long to act. FDA's own 
time-line on this issue indicates that concerns about this 
problem go back more than five years. The Committee expects FDA 
to act promptly to address violations of law and will monitor 
FDA's actions accordingly. The Committee will be examining this 
issue further this year.
    The Committee is aware that the FDA issued a monograph for 
sunscreen products in 2002, and the monograph was stayed 
shortly thereafter so that FDA could address the issue of 
measuring protection against UVA rays, which cause skin cancer. 
The Committee is disappointed that FDA has taken no further 
action, although skin cancer rates continue to rise, especially 
among young people and women. The Committee believes that a 
comprehensive monograph is essential to helping consumers make 
informed choices about protecting themselves against sun 
exposure. Therefore, the Committee directs FDA to issue a 
comprehensive monograph for over-the-counter sunscreen 
products, including UVA and UVB labeling requirements, within 
three months of enactment of this Act.
    The Committee is deeply concerned about the dangers of 
Salmonella, especially in highly susceptible populations like 
young children, pregnant women, individuals over 55, post 
operative patients, or individuals with compromised immune 
systems. The Committee recommends that the FDA encourage any 
facility that serves highly susceptible populations, including 
schools, hospitals, nursing homes, acute care facilities, day 
care centers, and hospice facilities to consider using eggs 
that have been pasteurized to destroy all viable salmonellae.
    The Committee is concerned that the FDA has still not 
finished its review of the safety for people of the 
subtherapeutic use of penicillin in animal feed and, 
accordingly, directs FDA to finish this review and make the 
review public by June 30, 2008.
    The conference report for fiscal year 2006 suggested that 
FDA review the implementation of new operating procedures in 
the Los Angeles district with regard to importers of ethnic 
foods. Last year, in response to questions from the Committee, 
FDA indicated that they have implemented several actions to 
improve the processing of food import entries. The Committee 
encourages FDA to consider establishing a formal process for 
tracking status inquiries.
    The Committee requests FDA to submit a report to the 
Committee on the implementation of the Combat Methamphetamine 
Epidemic Act of 2005 within 90 days of the date of enactment.
    Responsiveness to Inspector General recommendations.--The 
Committee directs the agency to submit a report by October 1, 
2007 on the status of all open audits and recommendations by 
OIG. The report must also include a plan for getting to 
resolution on all these open issues.
    Responsiveness to GAO recommendations.--The Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) maintains on its website a list of 
open recommendations from its review work. Currently, the GAO 
lists numerous reports with open recommendations involving FDA. 
The Committee directs FDA to report to the Committee by October 
1, 2007 on the status of all open GAO recommendations and on 
its plan to reach closure on each of them.
    High-Risk List.--In addition, the Committee directs FDA and 
USDA to work with GAO on a plan whose implementation would 
result in food safety being removed from GAO's High-Risk List 
and to submit a report on that plan to the Committee by October 
1, 2007.

                        BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES




2007 appropriation....................................        $4,950,000
2008 budget estimate..................................         4,950,000
Provided in the bill..................................         4,950,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................             - - -
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For Buildings and Facilities of the Food and Drug 
Administration, the Committee provides $4,950,000, the same as 
the amount available in fiscal year 2007 and the budget 
request.

                          INDEPENDENT AGENCIES


                  Commodity Futures Trading Commission





2007 appropriation....................................       $97,981,000
2008 budget estimate..................................       116,000,000
Provided in the bill..................................       102,550,000
Comparison:
    2007 appropriation................................        +4,569,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................       -13,450,000


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Committee 
provides an appropriation of $102,550,000, an increase of 
$4,569,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 and 
a decrease of $13,450,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee does not adopt the President's request to 
impose fees on futures transactions, totaling $86,000,000.
    The Committee recommendation includes $1,463,000 for pay 
costs as requested. The recommendation also includes $3,106,000 
for highest priority needs, including additional staff, 
technology improvements, and program funding for enforcement.

                       Farm Credit Administration


                 LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES




2007 limitation.......................................     ($44,250,000)
2008 budget estimate..................................      (46,000,000)
Provided in the bill..................................      (46,000,000)
Comparison:
    2007 limitation...................................        +1,750,000
    2008 budget estimate..............................             - - -


                          COMMITTEE PROVISIONS

    For a limitation on the expenses of the Farm Credit 
Administration, the Committee provides $46,000,000, an increase 
of $1,750,000 above the amount available for fiscal year 2007 
and the same as the budget request.

                     TITLE VII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

              INCLUDING RESCISSIONS AND TRANSFERS OF FUNDS

    The General Provisions contained in the accompanying bill 
for fiscal year 2008 are fundamentally the same as those 
included in last year's appropriations bill.
    Section 716: Language is included that allows funds to be 
used to carry out a competitive grants program.
    Section 718: Language is included that allows for 
reimbursement of the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust.
    Section 721: Language is included related to final 
rulemaking on cost-sharing for APHIS animal and plant health 
emergency programs.
    Section 722: Language is included to allow the disbursement 
of certain prior year obligations.
    Section 723: Language is included regarding the 
recertification of rural status.
    Section 724: Language is included that relates to 
government sponsored news stories.
    Section 725: The Committee includes $10,000,000 for a 
specialty crops competitiveness program.
    Section 726: Language is included that relates to 
importation of drugs.
    Section 727: Language is included related to competitive 
sourcing related to rural development and farm loan programs.
    Section 729: Language is included regarding the prohibition 
of funds for certain FDA activities.
    Section 730: Language is included regarding funding 
allocations for the expanded food nutrition and education 
program.
    Section 731: Language is included that limits 
implementation of a rule concerning countries eligible to 
export poultry products to the United States.
    Section 733: Language is included regarding meat 
inspection.
    Section 735: Language is included in regards to the water 
and waste direct loan program.
    Section 736: Language is included that provides for a 
national Simplified Summer Food Program.
    Section 737: Language is included that provides funding for 
a Fruit and Vegetable Pilot Program.
    Section 738: Language is included regarding the Federal 
Meat Inspection and other acts.
    Section 739: Language is included that rescinds certain 
funds.
    Section 740: Language is included to provide $2,475,000 for 
a hunger fellowship program.
    Section 741: Language is included that rescinds certain 
funds.
    Section 742: Language is included that repeals section 9012 
of Public Law 110-28.
    Section 743: Language is included that amends the Richard 
B. Russell National School Lunch Act.
    Section 744: Language is included regarding certain 
unexpended funds.
    Section 745: Language is included to provide that certain 
locations shall be considered eligible for certain rural 
development programs.
    Section 746: Language is included to prohibit funding 
certain activities.
    Section 747: Language is included to prohibit funding 
certain contracts.

              HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS


                        Constitutional Authority

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee on Appropriations bases 
its authority to report this legislation from clause 7 of 
section 9 of article I of the U.S. Constitution which states:

          No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in 
        consequence of Appropriations made by law . . .

                           Transfer of Funds

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following table lists the 
transfers of funds included in the accompanying bill.
    1. Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental 
Payments.--The bill allows funds to be transferred to cover the 
costs of new or replacement space.
    2. 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.
    3. Departmental Administration.--The bill requires 
reimbursement for expenses related to certain hearings.
    4. 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.
    5. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.--Authority 
is included to enable the Secretary of Agriculture to transfer 
from other appropriations or funds of the Department such sums 
as may be necessary to combat emergency outbreaks of certain 
diseases of animals, plants, and poultry.
    6. Agricultural Marketing Service.--The bill limits the 
transfer of section 32 funds to purposes specified in the bill.
    7. Farm Service Agency.--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.
    8. Dairy Indemnity Program.--The bill authorizes the 
transfer of funds to the Commodity Credit Corporation, by 
reference.
    9. Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund.--The bill provides 
that funds from the account shall be transferred to the Farm 
Service Agency salaries and expenses account, and that funds 
may be transferred among lending programs.
    10. Commodity Credit Corporation.--The bill includes 
language allowing certain funds transferred to the Foreign 
Agricultural Service for information resource management 
activities.
    11. Rural Community Advancement Program.--The bill provides 
that prior year balances for high cost energy grants shall be 
transferred to and merged with the High Energy Costs Grants 
Account.
    12. Rural Development Salaries and Expenses.--The bill 
provides that prior year balances from certain accounts shall 
be transferred to and merged with this account.
    13. Rural Housing Insurance Fund program account; Rural 
Development Loan Fund program account; and Rural 
Electrification and Telecommunications Loans program account.--
The bill provides that administrative funds shall be 
transferred to the Rural Development Salaries and Expenses 
Account.
    14. Rural Housing Insurance Fund program account and Rural 
Housing Assistance Grants account.--The bill provides that 
balances for demonstration programs shall be transferred to and 
merged with the Rural Housing Service, Multifamily Housing 
Revitalization Program Account.
    15. Child Nutrition Programs.--The bill includes authority 
to transfer section 32 funds to these programs.
    16. Foreign Agricultural Service.--The bill allows for the 
transfer of funds from the Commodity Credit Corporation Export 
Loan Program Account and from the Public Law 480 Program 
Account.
    17. Public Law 480 Title I Program Account.--The bill 
allows funds to be transferred to the Farm Service Agency, 
Salaries and Expenses accounts. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Food and Drug Administration, Salaries and Expenses.--
The bill allows funds to be transferred among activities.

               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. Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental 
Payments.--Language is included that allows for the 
reconfiguration and release of space back into the General 
Services Administration inventory in order to reduce space 
rental cost for space not needed for USDA programs.
    3. Departmental Administration.--Language is included to 
reimburse the agency for travel expenses incident to the 
holding of hearings.
    4. Agricultural Research Service.--Language is included 
that allows the Agricultural Research Service to grant 
easements at the Beltsville, MD agricultural research center.
    5. Agricultural Research Service.--The bill includes 
language that prohibits funds from being used to carry out 
research related to the production, processing or marketing of 
tobacco or tobacco products.
    6. Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
Service.--The bill includes language that prohibits funds from 
being used to carry out research related to the production, 
processing or marketing of tobacco or tobacco products.
    7. 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.
    8. Agricultural Marketing Service.--The bill includes 
language that allows the Secretary to charge user fees for AMS 
activity related to preparation of standards.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Dairy Indemnity Program.--Language is included by 
reference that allows the Secretary to utilize the services of 
the Commodity Credit Corporation for the purpose of making 
dairy indemnity payments.
    12. Risk Management Agency.--Language is included to limit 
the amount of funds for official reception and representation 
expenses.
    13. Commodity Credit Corporation Fund.--Language is 
included to provide for the reimbursement appropriation. 
Language is also included to allow certain funds transferred 
from the Commodity Credit Corporation to be used for 
information resource management. In addition, language is 
included which limits the amount of funds that can be spent on 
operation and maintenance costs of CCC hazardous waste sites.
    14. 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 authorized by basic law.
    15. Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations.--Language 
which was included in the Emergency Jobs Bill of 1983 (P.L. 98-
8) and all bills since 1984 provides that funds may be used for 
rehabilitation of existing works.
    16. Rural Housing Service--Rental Assistance Program.--
Language is included which provides that agreements entered 
into during the current fiscal year be funded for a one-year 
period.
    17. Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loan 
program account.--Language is included to allow borrowers' 
interest rates for loans to exceed seven percent.
    18. Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, 
Infants, and Children (WIC).--Language is included to: provide 
funds for a breastfeeding support initiative; pay 
administrative expenses of clinics except those that have an 
announced policy prohibiting smoking within the space used to 
carry out the program; purchase infant formula except in 
accordance with law; or pay for activities that are not fully 
reimbursed by other departments or agencies unless authorized 
by law.
    19. Food Stamp Program.--Language is included to exclude 
special pay for military personnel deployed to designated 
combat areas.
    20. 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.
    21. Commodity Futures Trading Commission.--Language is 
included to limit the amount of funds for official reception 
and representation expenses.
    22. General Provisions.--
    Section 702: This provision, carried since 1976, is again 
included which provides that certain appropriations in this Act 
shall remain available until expended where the programs or 
projects involved are continuing in nature under the provisions 
of authorizing legislation, but for which such legislation may 
not specifically provide for extended availability. This 
authority tends to result in savings by preventing the wasteful 
practice often found in government of rushing to commit funds 
at the end of the fiscal year without due regard to the value 
of the purpose for which the funds are used. Such extended 
availability is also essential in view of the long lead time 
frequently required to negotiate agreements or contracts which 
normally extend over a period of more than one year. Under 
these conditions such authority is commonly provided in 
Appropriations Acts where omitted from basic law. These 
provisions have been carried through the years in this Act to 
facilitate efficient and effective program execution and to 
assure maximum savings. They involve the following items: 
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, the contingency 
fund to meet emergency conditions, information technology 
infrastructure, the fruit fly program, emerging plant pests, 
the cotton pests program, avian influenza programs, up to 
$4,505,000 in the Pest and Disease Management program to 
control grasshoppers and Mormon crickets, up to $1,500,000 in 
the scrapie program for indemnities, up to $3,000,000 in the 
emergency management systems program for the vaccine bank, up 
to $1,000,000 for wildlife services methods development, up to 
$1,000,000 of the wildlife services operations program for 
aviation safety, and up to 25 percent of the screwworm program; 
Food Safety and Inspection Service, Public Health Data 
Communication Infrastructure System; Cooperative State 
Research, Education, and Extension Service, funds for 
competitive research grants (7 U.S.C. 450i(b)), funds for the 
Research, Education, and Economics Information System, and 
funds for the Native American Institutions Endowment Fund; Farm 
Service Agency, salaries and expenses funds made available to 
county committees; Foreign Agricultural Service, middle-income 
country training program, and up to $2,000,000 of the Foreign 
Agricultural Service appropriation for foreign currency 
fluctuations.
    Section 706: 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 Cooperative State Research, 
Education, and Extension Service in excess of 20 percent of 
total direct costs, except for grants available under the Small 
Business Innovation and Development Act.
    Section 707: 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. The Credit Reform Act 
requires that the lifetime costs of loans be appropriated. 
Current law requires that funds unexpended after five years 
expire. The life of some loans extends well beyond the five-
year period and this provision allows funds appropriated to 
remain available until the loans are closed out.
    Section 708: Provides that of the funds made available, not 
more than $1,800,000 shall be used to cover expenses of 
activities related to all advisory committees, panels, 
commissions, and task forces of the Department of Agriculture 
except for panels used to comply with negotiated rule makings 
and panels used to evaluate competitively awarded grants.
    Section 709: Provides that none of the funds may be used to 
carry out certain provisions of meat and poultry inspection 
acts.
    Section 710: 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 711: This provision prohibits the Department of 
Agriculture from transmitting or making available to any non-
Department of Agriculture or the Food and Drug Administration 
employee questions or responses to questions that are a result 
of information requested for the appropriations hearing 
process.
    Section 712: Language is included that requires approval of 
the Chief Information Officer and the concurrence of the 
Executive Information Technology Investment Review Board for 
acquisition of new information technology systems or 
significant upgrades, and that prohibits the transfer of funds 
to the Office of the Chief Information Officer without the 
notification of the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses 
of Congress.
    Section 713: Language is included that requires certain 
reprogramming procedures of funds provided in Appropriations 
Acts.
    Section 714: 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 715: Language is included that provides that no 
funds may be used to close or relocate a Rural Development 
office unless or until cost effectiveness and enhancement of 
program delivery have been determined. The bill also requires 
notification and a report to the Committees on Appropriation 
prior to the proposed closure or relocation.
    Section 716: This provision provides that of the funds made 
available for competitive research grants, the Secretary of 
Agriculture may use up to 22 percent of the amount provided to 
carry out a competitive grants program under the same terms and 
conditions as those provided for the Initiative for Future Food 
and Agriculture Systems.
    Section 717: Language is included that limits the 
environmental quality incentives program.
    Section 718: Language is included that allows for 
reimbursement of the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust.
    Section 719: Language is included that limits the dam 
rehabilitation program.
    Section 720: Language is included that rescinds certain 
funds.
    Section 721: Language is included related to final 
rulemaking on costsharing for APHIS animal and plant health 
emergency programs.
    Section 722: Language is included regarding the 
availability of funds for certain conservation programs.
    Section 723: Language is included regarding recertification 
of rural status.
    Section 724: Language is included that relates to 
government sponsored news stories.
    Section 725: Language is included to provide funds for a 
specialty crops competitiveness program.
    Section 726: Language is included regarding the importation 
of drugs.
    Section 727: Language is included related to competitive 
sourcing with respect to rural development or farm loan 
programs.
    Section 728: Language is included that rescinds certain 
funds.
    Section 729: Language is included regarding the Food and 
Drug Administration advisory committees.
    Section 730: Language is included regarding funding 
allocations for the expanded food nutrition and education 
program.
    Section 731: Language is included prohibiting the 
establishment or implementation of a rule regarding importation 
of poultry products.
    Section 732: Language is included that rescinds certain 
funds.
    Section 733: Language is included regarding the use of 
funds to implement the risk-based inspection program.
    Section 734: Language is included related to funds made 
available under section 522(e) of the Federal Crop Insurance 
Act.
    Section 735: Language is included regarding the Water and 
Waste Systems Direct Loan Program.
    Section 736: Language is included amending the Richard B. 
Russell National School Lunch Act.
    Section 737: Language is included that provides funding for 
a Fruit and Vegetable Pilot Program.
    Section 738: Language is included regarding the Federal 
Meat Inspection and other acts.
    Section 739: Language is included that rescinds certain 
funds.
    Section 740: Language is included to provide $2,475,000 for 
a hunger fellowship program.
    Section 741: Language is included that rescinds certain 
funds.
    Section 742: Language is included that repeals section 9012 
of Public Law 110-28.
    Section 743: Language is included that amends the Richard 
B. Russell National School Lunch Act.
    Section 744: Language is included regarding certain 
unexpended funds.
    Section 745: Language is included to provide that certain 
locations shall be considered eligible for certain rural 
development programs.
    Section 746: Language is included to prohibit funding 
certain activities.
    Section 747: Language is included to prohibit funding 
certain contracts.

         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.

          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):

              RICHARD B. RUSSELL NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH ACT


                SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM FOR CHILDREN

  Sec. 13. (a) * * *
  (b) Service Institutions.--
          (1) Payments.--
                  [(A) In general.--Except as otherwise 
                provided in this paragraph, payments to service 
                institutions shall equal the full cost of food 
                service operations (which cost shall include 
                the costs of obtaining, preparing, and serving 
                food, but shall not include administrative 
                costs).]
                  [(B) Maximum amounts.--Subject to 
                subparagraph (C), payments to any institution 
                under subparagraph (A) shall not exceed]
                  (A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B) 
                and in addition to amounts made available under 
                paragraph (3), payments to service institutions 
                shall be--
                          (i) $1.97 for each lunch and supper 
                        served;
                          (ii) $1.13 for each breakfast served; 
                        and
                          (iii) 46 cents for each meal 
                        supplement served.
                  [(C)] (B) Adjustments.--Amounts specified in 
                subparagraph [(B)] (A) shall be adjusted on 
                January 1, 1997, and each January 1 thereafter, 
                to the nearest lower cent increment to reflect 
                changes for the 12-month period ending the 
                preceding November 30 in the series for food 
                away from home of the Consumer Price Index for 
                All Urban Consumers published by the Bureau of 
                Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor. 
                Each adjustment shall be based on the unrounded 
                adjustment for the prior 12-month period.
                  [(D)] (C) Seamless summer reimbursements.--A 
                service institution described in subsection 
                (a)(8) shall be reimbursed for meals and meal 
                supplements in accordance with the applicable 
                provisions under this Act (other than 
                subparagraphs [(A), (B), and (C)] (A) and (B) 
                of this paragraph and paragraph (4)) and the 
                Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et 
                seq.), as determined by the Secretary.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (3) Every service institution, when applying for 
participation in the program, shall submit a complete budget 
for administrative costs related to the program, which shall be 
subject to approval by the State. Payment to service 
institutions for administrative costs shall equal the [full 
amount of State approved administrative costs incurred, except 
that such payment to service institutions may not exceed the 
maximum allowable] levels determined by the Secretary pursuant 
to the study prescribed in paragraph (4) of this subsection.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 17. CHILD AND ADULT CARE FOOD PROGRAM.

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (r) Program for At-Risk School Children.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (5) Limitation.--The Secretary shall limit 
        reimbursement under this subsection for meals served 
        under a program to institutions located in [seven] 
        eight States, of which [five] six States shall be West 
        Virginia, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Delaware, 
        and Michigan and two States shall be approved by the 
        Secretary through a competitive application process.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                             PILOT PROJECTS

  Sec. 18. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(f) Simplified Summer Food Programs.--
          [(1) Definition of eligible state.--In this 
        subsection, the term ``eligible State'' means--
                  [(A) a State participating in the program 
                under this subsection as of May 1, 2004; and
                  [(B) a State in which (based on data 
                available in June 2005)--
                          [(i) the percentage obtained by 
                        dividing--
                                  [(I) the sum of--
                                          [(aa) the average 
                                        daily number of 
                                        children attending the 
                                        summer food service 
                                        program in the State in 
                                        July 2003; and
                                          [(bb) the average 
                                        daily number of 
                                        children receiving free 
                                        or reduced price meals 
                                        under the school lunch 
                                        program in the State in 
                                        July 2003; by
                                  [(II) the average daily 
                                number of children receiving 
                                free or reduced price meals 
                                under the school lunch program 
                                in the State in March 2003; is 
                                less than
                          [(ii) 75 percent of the percentage 
                        obtained by dividing--
                                  [(I) the sum of--
                                          [(aa) the average 
                                        daily number of 
                                        children attending the 
                                        summer food service 
                                        program in all States 
                                        in July 2003; and
                                          [(bb) the average 
                                        daily number of 
                                        children receiving free 
                                        or reduced price meals 
                                        under the school lunch 
                                        program in all States 
                                        in July 2003; by
                                  [(II) the average daily 
                                number of children receiving 
                                free or reduced price meals 
                                under the school lunch program 
                                in all States in March 2003.
          [(2) Programs.--The Secretary shall carry out a 
        summer food program in each eligible State to increase 
        the number of children participating in the summer food 
        service program in the State.
          [(3) Support levels for service institutions.--
                  [(A) Food service.--Under the program, a 
                service institution in an eligible State shall 
                receive the maximum amounts for food service 
                under section 13(b)(1) without regard to the 
                requirement under section 13(b)(1)(A) that 
                payments shall equal the full cost of food 
                service operations.
                  [(B) Administrative costs.--Under the 
                program, a service institution in an eligible 
                State shall receive the maximum amounts for 
                administrative costs determined by the 
                Secretary under section 13(b)(4) without regard 
                to the requirement under section 13(b)(3) that 
                payments to service institutions shall equal 
                the full amount of State-approved 
                administrative costs incurred.
                  [(C) Compliance.--A service institution that 
                receives assistance under this subsection shall 
                comply with all provisions of section 13 other 
                than subsections (b)(1)(A) and (b)(3) of 
                section 13.
          [(4) Maintenance of effort.--Expenditures of funds 
        from State and local sources for maintenance of a 
        summer food service program shall not be diminished as 
        a result of assistance from the Secretary received 
        under this subsection.
          [(5) Evaluation of programs.--
                  [(A) In general.--The Secretary, acting 
                through the Administrator of the Food and 
                Nutrition Service, shall conduct an evaluation 
                of the program.
                  [(B) Content.--An evaluation under this 
                paragraph shall describe--
                          [(i) any effect on participation by 
                        children and service institutions in 
                        the summer food service program in the 
                        eligible State in which the program is 
                        carried out;
                          [(ii) any effect of the program on 
                        the quality of the meals and 
                        supplements served in the eligible 
                        State in which the program is carried 
                        out; and
                          [(iii) any effect of the program on 
                        program integrity.
          [(6) Report.--Not later than April 30, 2007, the 
        Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Education 
        and the Workforce of the House of Representatives and 
        the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 
        of the Senate a report that includes--
                  [(A) the evaluations completed by the 
                Secretary under paragraph (5); and
                  [(B) any recommendations of the Secretary 
                concerning the programs.]
  [(g)] (f) Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(h)] (g) Summer Food Service Residential Camp Eligibility.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(i)] (h) Access to Local Foods and School Gardens.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(j)] (i) Year-Round Services for Eligible Entities.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(k)] (j) Free Lunch and Breakfast Eligibility.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


SECTION 9012 OF U.S. TROOP READINESS, VETERANS' CARE, KATRINA RECOVERY, 
            AND IRAQ ACCOUNTABILITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007


                          (Public Law 110-28)

[SEC. 9012. CONTRACT WAIVER.

  [In carrying out crop disaster and livestock assistance in 
this title, the Secretary shall require forage producers to 
have participated in a crop insurance pilot program or the Non-
Insured Crop Disaster Assistance Program during the crop year 
for which compensation is received.]

                  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:


                              Rescissions

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following table lists the 
rescissions in the accompanying bill:
    The bill proposes rescissions of $34,000,000 of funds 
derived from interest on the cushion of credit payments in 
fiscal year 2008 under the Rural Economic Development Loans 
Program Account, which is an annual technical adjustment 
contained in the budget estimates; $25,740,000 from the High 
Energy Cost grants account; $16,069,000 from the Special 
Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children 
account; and $210,361,000 from Section 32 funds.

                 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
                             -------------------------------------------
     Full committee data        Budget                Budget
                              authority   Outlays   authority   Outlays
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison with Budget
 Resolution:
    Discretionary...........    $18,817    $20,027    $18,817  \1\ $19,8
                                                                      72
    Mandatory...............     32,905     21,115     32,905    21,115
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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]



Outlays:
    2008..............................................           $67,361
    2009..............................................             3,313
    2010..............................................             1,122
    2011..............................................               281
    2012..............................................               227


               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......................................           $26,148
Fiscal Year 2008 outlays resulting therefrom..........            25,627


                                Earmarks

    Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House 
of Representatives, this bill, as reported, contains the 
following congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or 
limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or 
9(f) of rule XXI.



 MINORITY VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE JERRY LEWIS AND REPRESENTATIVE JACK 
                                KINGSTON

    The fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for Agriculture, 
Rural Development, the Food and Drug Administration and Related 
Agencies funds critical agricultural research; farm and 
conservation programs; trade, marketing and regulatory 
programs; rural housing, electric, and economic development; 
nutrition assistance and international food aid; and food and 
drug safety. As a result, this bill directly and indirectly 
reaches every American, and millions of others around the 
world, everyday.
    Chairwoman DeLauro has held numerous hearings this year. We 
have participated in those hearings and are appreciative of the 
fact that all subcommittee members have been given ample time 
and opportunity to question witnesses. We will support the 
Chairwoman in this process; our subcommittee hearings continue 
to embrace a spirit of bipartisanship as they have in the past.

                         FISCAL ACCOUNTABILITY

    The 302(b) allocation to the Subcommittee is $18.817 
billion. This is an increase of $1.043 billion, or 5.9 percent, 
above the FY '07 enacted level and an increase of $982 million, 
or 5.6 percent, above the President's request. When the impact 
of funding limitations on mandatory programs is figured in, the 
fiscal year 2008 allocation represents a 3.6 percent increase 
above the fiscal year 2007 enacted level. Mr. Kingston offered 
an amendment in full committee to reduce the spending in this 
bill by 3.6 percent. That amendment was defeated by voice vote. 
The President has made clear that he will veto spending bills 
that exceed his overall top-line request for discretionary 
spending, and this bill does that.
    While we support the Committee's efforts in writing this 
bill and report, there are several accounts in the bill in 
which special accommodations were made and the Democrat 
majority, in our view, provides excessive funding increases 
while failing to recognize the substantial investments made by 
this Subcommittee on a bipartisan basis in recent years.

                          FLOOR CONSIDERATION

    It is striking that the Agriculture Appropriations bill, 
one of the most widely supported and least controversial of our 
spending measures, is being scheduled for consideration so late 
in the legislative cycle. Traditionally, this bill has been one 
of the first annual spending bills approved by the House. The 
fiscal year 2007 Agriculture Appropriations bill was passed out 
of the House on May 23, 2006 and the fiscal year 2006 bill was 
passed on June 8, 2005. We would urge Chairman Obey to consider 
restoring the tradition of moving this bill earlier in the 
legislative process.
    We would also strongly encourage the House and Senate 
Appropriations leadership to agree to move all appropriations 
bills by the Summer adjournment date in order to prevent a 
legislation train wreck at the end of the year. House Members 
have worked round the clock to pass bills off the floor while 
the Senate remains unable to move its spending bills beyond 
full committee.
    Lastly, we are concerned by the fact that the Democrat 
majority imposed at least 45 reporting requirements upon the 
USDA and FDA at various intervals throughout fiscal year 2007 
and fiscal year 2008. While necessary in some instances, an 
excessive number of reports place an undue burden upon these 
agencies, and in many instances, takes away from time better 
spent performing agency-critical functions.

                        IMPROVEMENTS TO THE BILL

    There were several issues that the Subcommittee Ranking 
Member brought to the attention of the Chairwoman, requesting 
that these issues be addressed in the managers' amendment at 
full committee. We appreciate the following improvements made 
to the bill:
           Funding to increase capacity of the Economic 
        Research Service to meet the demand for farm bill and 
        rural economic analysis;
           Clarification of resources that are 
        available to the Inspector General as a result of a 
        transfer of personnel to the Homeland Security Staff;
           Report on renewable energy loans and grants 
        to ensure that these projects have measurable results; 
        and,
           Inspector General audit of the rural 
        broadband program to ensure that the government is not 
        competing with the private sector.

                          LABORATORY CAPACITY

    Unfortunately, many of our concerns were not fully 
addressed or addressed at all. For instance, we remain 
concerned about the fact that the bill does not include funds 
the President requested for laboratory capacity. A recent GAO 
study on avian influenza preparedness conveyed concern that 
government investigators are worried about incomplete 
information, the ability of laboratories to handle a surge in 
testing, disposal of carcasses, and uncertainty as to the 
amount of antiviral medication needed for workers depopulating 
diseased animals and cleaning infected facilities. If an 
outbreak should occur, at current funding levels, laboratories 
would not have the capability to handle testing activities, 
therefore hampering the Agency's ability to contain, control, 
and eradicate a disease quickly and effectively. The requested 
funding would have addressed these issues. We remain hopeful 
that the Committee can address this shortfall as the bill moves 
through the legislative process.

               COUNTRY OF ORIGIN LABELING (COOL) FUNDING

    We also have strong reservations about providing $2 million 
for the implementation of the COOL requirements for all covered 
commodities. There is no information available relating to the 
use of these funds, or even why they are needed in fiscal year 
2008. The funding may, in fact, be premature since COOL will 
not be enacted until September 30, 2008. With the fierce 
competition for funds, this $2 million could be put to better 
use elsewhere in the bill.
    Further complicating matters, the timeline that the 
Democrat majority directs for the implementation of COOL for 
all covered commodities is based on statute enacted in 2002. 
Yet, on July 19, 2007, the House Agriculture Committee passed 
an amendment during consideration of the new farm bill that 
makes changes to the 2002 statute.

               FARM SERVICE AGENCY (FSA) OFFICE CLOSURES

    Further, we are concerned about the restrictive FSA office 
closure language included in the bill. In many cases, the USDA 
has completed required steps to close certain offices under 
provisions set forth in fiscal year 2006, and again in the 
Continuing Resolution that agencies are operating under this 
fiscal year. Members are urged to consider these facts: there 
are 58 FSA offices that have no staff; 139 offices that have 
one employee; 338 that have two employees; and 515 offices that 
have three employees.
    It is also worth noting that the funding level included in 
the bill for FSA salaries and expenses is $102 million below 
the President's budget request. As a result, the Democrat 
majority has significantly cut the appropriation below the 
request while prohibiting the FSA from closing unneeded 
offices. There are many States that, while not necessarily 
happy with proposals to close some offices, are willing to work 
with the FSA to close offices that should no longer be open. 
The minority worked with Chairwoman DeLauro to modify the 
language in the bill in order to continue making progress on 
this issue. Ranking Member Kingston offered an amendment that 
would allow FSA to close those offices that have zero 
employees, and the amendment was adopted by the full committee. 
People often ask why government can't run more efficiently. 
Closing FSA offices provides a good example. It's hard to run 
an agency with 435 managers second-guessing all decisions.

                       FUNDING FOR RURAL AMERICA

    The fiscal year 2008 Committee-reported bill continues the 
Subcommittee's commitment to rural America. From fiscal year 
2001 through the House-passed fiscal year 2007 bill, the 
Committee provided more than $72.4 billion for the following 
programs:
          Rural Community Advancement Program--$5.7 billion
          Rural Housing (loans, subsidies)--$38 billion
          Rural Electric (loans, subsidies)--$28.7 billion

                               FARM LABOR

    The bill contains large increases over both fiscal year 
2007 and above the fiscal year 2008 request in loans and grant 
funds for construction of facilities for farm laborers. The 
program cannot really function effectively without substantial 
rental assistance and a deep subsidy. Of further concern is 
that the program is limited to domestic farm workers. As a 
result, the program is not widely used by many states. In our 
view, these issues should be thoroughly analyzed before 
providing substantial increases.

                            RENEWABLE ENERGY

    Renewable energy funding is strongly supported on a 
bipartisan basis and the demand for on-farm renewable energy 
facilities has increased. But this is the kind of program that 
can easily turn into a boondoggle and leave the taxpayer 
holding the bag for a bunch of small white elephants that don't 
work or are not used. Free money tends to produce these kinds 
of results. The funding should be directed towards projects 
that actually work, save taxpayers money, and use proven 
technology. These funds are not for research nor are they for 
high risk ventures. We urge that the Democrat majority work to 
ensure that this investment is based on outcomes and results 
rather than pure political emotion.

        RURAL BROADBAND/DISTANCE LEARNING AND TELEMEDICINE (DLT)

    We continue to have reservations about this program. It is 
one thing for the federal government to help expand the use of 
DLT and broadband services. It is quite another for the 
government to both compete with and undermine the private 
sector where they would operate except for being undercut by 
the government. The increases provided in this bill should not 
be enacted until and unless that issue has been resolved or it 
will exacerbate the problem. In addition, there are concerns 
about the government subsidizing the implementation of internet 
services for individuals that have the wherewithal to pay those 
costs. We are all for helping rural, low-income areas but not 
the retired doctor who has moved to a mountain-top lodge who is 
unable to use his laptop to access the latest stock quotes from 
the NYSE.

                                  WIC

    The mark includes $5.62 billion dollars for WIC. This is a 
$415.6 million increase above FY '07 and an increase of $223.4 
million above the President's request. We have not seen any 
justification of how the Democrat majority arrived at this 
funding level.
    While the Committee has a clear and strong history of 
supporting this important program, the vastly increased WIC 
appropriations are coming at the expense of other critical 
programs that are equally important to the health and welfare 
of Americans as a whole. These include rural water, housing, 
telecommunications and utilities that are so important to rural 
America; research, education, and extension programs that 
enable the safe and abundant food supply for this and coming 
generations; conservation programs that protect our watersheds, 
rivers, and air quality; and the countless other programs 
funded by this bill.
    Nearly half of the increase in the subcommittee's 302(b) 
allocation goes to this program at the expense of the very 
programs which are designed to diminish the need for WIC 
participation. WIC is an important program, but one that treats 
the result of the problem, and not the problem itself.
    There is clear evidence of the Committee's longstanding 
support of the WIC program. Total funding for this program grew 
by $1.2 billion in six years, from $4.043 billion in 2001 to 
$5.244 billion in fiscal year 2007. Congress should closely 
examine how this program is currently funded, and how it will 
be funded in the future, as this program alone consumes nearly 
30 percent of the discretionary budget authority in this bill.
    Another issue that Congress should examine is Medicaid 
adjunctive-eligibility for WIC participants. This provision 
allows that those eligible to receive food stamps, Medicaid, 
and TANF--or even certain family members that are eligible to 
receive Medicaid or TANF--have automatic income eligibility for 
WIC. For the WIC program, the State agency's income standard 
must be between 100 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) 
guidelines, but no more than 185 percent of FPL. However, this 
limit becomes less meaningful for those who live in states with 
Medicaid eligibility above 185 percent. Some states, such as 
Hawaii and New Hampshire, have Medicaid eligibility 
requirements of 300 percent of FPL. This is shocking. Under the 
guidelines, those states whose Medicaid eligibilities are set 
at 300 percent of FPL--which in some cases can be about $62,000 
for a family of four--can also automatically receive WIC 
funding in addition to their Medicaid dollars. We believe that 
this is not the intention of the program.

                                  FDA

    At $1.698 billion, the bill includes a $128 million 
increase above fiscal year 2007 for the Food and Drug 
Administration, and $62 million above the President's request. 
Our hope is that the Chairwoman's goal is to direct these 
resources toward the inspection of those products that have 
caused so much pain and suffering in this country as a result 
of weak regulatory controls in exporting countries.
    The bill includes a major, controversial provision that 
allows the importation of prescription drugs. If this provision 
is going to remain in the bill, then there should be funding to 
ensure the safety and efficacy of those imported drugs.

                            HORSE SLAUGHTER

    Without any consultation with the minority, the Democrat 
majority decided to include multiple horse slaughter provisions 
that are troublesome and may have many unintended consequences. 
The provision would bar oversight not only for transportation 
and export of horses intended for human consumption, but also 
for horses to be transported for any purpose, including the 
prevention and the spread of communicable disease. The 
interstate movement, import, and export of live horses for any 
purpose would be shut down by the provision by virtue of the 
prohibition on inspection activities including the creation, 
distribution, certification, endorsement or filing of ``any 
certificate concerning horses.'' Finally, and most importantly, 
the prohibition on the assessment and collection of fees under 
21 U.S.C. 136 would make it impossible for the Secretary to 
administer federal animal quarantine laws regarding horses not 
merely at importation, but domestically as well, under existing 
regional animal disease programs. Because these provisions were 
not well written and their adverse effects not contemplated, 
they will cause harm to the entire horse industry in this 
country.

             FOOD AID/FOREIGN AGRICULTURAL SERVICE FUNDING

    Our colleagues should be made aware of the fact that we 
have had no hearings on one of the major accounts in this bill. 
This bill appropriates $1.483 billion for the Foreign 
Agricultural Service and International Food Aid programs of 
which $1.219 billion is for Title II--Public Law 480 grants, 
$164 million is for the Foreign Agricultural Service, and $100 
million is for the McGovern-Dole International Feeding Program. 
The Chairwoman has indicated her willingness to proceed with 
hearings on this important subject matter at a later date, and 
we look forward to this opportunity.
    In conclusion, we would not have funded some of the 
increases in the bill the way the Democrat majority did, nor 
rescinded the level of funds that the majority has from section 
32. We would have put all available offsets on the table for 
consideration as we have in the past, and would have worked 
with an allocation that could be supported by the Legislative 
and Executive branches. Our hope is that the bill, as it moves 
through the legislative process, can be improved to the point 
that it will become a legislative product the President will 
sign.

                                  
