[Senate Report 111-43]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                       Calendar No. 102
111th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session                                                     111-43

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



 
  FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2010

                                _______
                                

                  July 9, 2009.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

           Mr. Durbin, from the Committee on Appropriations, 
                        submitted the following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 1432]

    The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1432) 
making appropriations for financial services and general 
government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and 
for other purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends 
that the bill do pass.



Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 2010

Total of bill as reported to the Senate................. $46,479,193,000
Amount of 2009 appropriations\1\........................  51,470,576,000
Amount of 2010 budget estimate..........................  46,439,230,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
    2009 appropriations.................................  -4,991,383,000
    2010 budget estimate................................     +39,963,000

\1\Includes $6,858,000,000 in emergency appropriations appropriated in 
Public Law 111-5, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, 
and $30,936,000 in emergency appropriations appropriated in Public Law 
111-32, the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009.


                                CONTENTS

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Overview and Summary of Bill.....................................     5
Title I: Department of the Treasury:
    Departmental Offices.........................................     9
        Department-Wide Systems and Capital Investments Programs.    14
        Office of the Inspector General..........................    14
        Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration........    15
    Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.........................    17
    Treasury Forfeiture Fund.....................................    18
    Financial Management Service.................................    19
    Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau.....................    20
    United States Mint...........................................    20
    Bureau of the Public Debt....................................    21
    Community Development Financial Institutions Fund............    21
    Bureau of Engraving and Printing.............................    23
    Internal Revenue Service.....................................    23
        Taxpayer Services........................................    26
        Enforcement..............................................    29
        Operations Support.......................................    31
        Business Systems Modernization...........................    32
        Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration...............    33
    Administrative Provisions--Internal Revenue Service..........    33
    Administrative Provisions--Department of the Treasury........    34
Title II: Executive Office of the President and Funds 
  Appropriated to the President:
    Compensation of the President................................    36
    The White House..............................................    36
    Executive Residence at the White House.......................    37
    White House Repair and Restoration...........................    37
    Council of Economic Advisers.................................    38
    Office of Policy Development.................................    38
    National Security Council....................................    38
    Office of Administration.....................................    39
    Office of Management and Budget..............................    40
    Office of National Drug Control Policy.......................    41
    Funds Appropriated to the President:
        High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas....................    42
        Other Federal Drug Control Programs......................    43
    Unanticipated Needs..........................................    46
    Partnership Fund for Program Integrity Innovation............    46
    Presidential Transition Administrative Support...............    47
    Special Assistance to the President..........................    47
    Official Residence of the Vice President.....................    48
    Administrative Provisions--Executive Office of the President 
      and Funds Appropriated to the President....................    48
Title III: The Judiciary:
    Supreme Court of the United States...........................    49
    United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.......    50
    United States Court of International Trade...................    51
    Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial 
      Services...................................................    51
    Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund.............................    52
    Defender Services............................................    52
    Fees of Jurors and Commissioners.............................    53
    Court Security...............................................    53
    Administrative Office of the United States Courts............    54
    Federal Judicial Center......................................    54
    Judicial Retirement Funds....................................    55
    United States Sentencing Commission..........................    55
    Administrative Provisions--The Judiciary.....................    55
Title IV--District of Columbia:
    Federal Funds:
        Federal Payment for Resident Tuition Support.............    57
        Federal Payment for Emergency Planning and Security Costs 
          in the District of Columbia............................    58
        Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Courts.......    59
        Defender Services in District of Columbia Courts.........    60
        Federal Payment to the Court Services and Offender 
          Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia........    61
        Federal Payment to the Public Defender Service for the 
          District of Columbia...................................    62
        Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Water and 
          Sewer Authority........................................    62
        Federal Payment to the Criminal Justice Coordinating 
          Council................................................    63
        Federal Payment for Judicial Commissions.................    64
        Federal Payment to the Office of the Chief Financial 
          Officer of the District of Columbia....................    64
        Federal Payment for School Improvement...................    65
        Federal Payment to Jump Start Public School Reform.......    69
        Federal Payment for Consolidated Laboratory Facility.....    70
        Federal Payment for the D.C. National Guard..............    71
        Federal Payment for Permanent Supportive Housing.........    71
        Federal Payment for Reconnecting Disconnected Youth......    72
        Federal Payment for Central Library and Branch Locations.    72
        Federal Payment to the Executive Office of the Mayor of 
          the District of Columbia...............................    73
    District of Columbia Local Operating Budget..................    74
Title V--Independent Agencies:
    Administrative Conference of the United States...............    75
    Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation...................    75
    Commodity Futures Trading Commission.........................    76
    Consumer Product Safety Commission...........................    78
    Election Assistance Commission...............................    79
    Federal Communications Commission............................    80
    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: Office of Inspector 
      General....................................................    82
    Federal Election Commission..................................    83
    Federal Labor Relations Authority............................    83
    Federal Trade Commission.....................................    84
    Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission..........................    86
    General Services Administration..............................    86
    Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation........................    99
    Merit Systems Protection Board...............................   100
    Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National 
      Environmental Policy Foundation............................   100
    National Archives and Records Administration.................   101
    National Credit Union Administration.........................   106
    Office of Government Ethics..................................   107
    Office of Personnel Management...............................   108
    Office of Special Counsel....................................   113
    Postal Regulatory Commission.................................   114
    Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board..................   115
    Recovery Act Accountability and Transparency Board...........   115
    Securities and Exchange Commission...........................   116
    Selective Service System.....................................   118
    Small Business Administration................................   119
    United States Postal Service.................................   128
    Office of Inspector General..................................   131
    United States Tax Court......................................   132
Title VI--General Provisions--This Act...........................   134
Title VII--General Provisions--Government-Wide...................   136
Title VIII--General Provisions--District of Columbia.............   140
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of 
  the Sen- 
  ate............................................................   142
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules 
  of the Senate..................................................   143
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of 
  the Senate.....................................................   144
Budgetary Impact of Bill.........................................   146
Disclosure of Congressionally Directed Spending Items............   146
Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority....................   153

                    OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL

    Fiscal year 2010 marks the third year for the Financial 
Services and General Government appropriations bill. The bill 
provides funding for the Department of the Treasury, including 
the Internal Revenue Service; the Executive Office of the 
President; the Judiciary; the District of Columbia; and more 
than two dozen independent Federal agencies.
    The Committee recommends $46,479,193,000 in discretionary 
and mandatory appropriations. This represents a decrease of 
$4,991,383,000 over the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, and an 
increase of $39,963,000 over the budget request. Of the total, 
$24,400,000,000 is provided in discretionary appropriations, 
$13,463,000 above the budget request of $24,386,537,000. 
Mandatory appropriations total $22,079,193,000.
    The Committee-recommended bill is consistent with the 
allocation for the Financial Services and General Government 
appropriations bill. The Committee has made difficult but 
necessary decisions to craft a bill that is within strict 
fiscal limitations.

                             PROJECT FUNDING
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Items in Senate
                                         bill at        Congressionally
              Agency                   President's     directed spending
                                         request         in Senate bill
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of the Treasury........  .................         $3,150,000
District of Columbia..............  .................          1,000,000
General Services Administration...       $680,913,000        222,900,000
National Archives and Records              17,500,000  .................
 Administration...................
Office of National Drug Control             2,250,000  .................
 Policy...........................
Small Business Administration.....  .................         27,726,750
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total.......................        700,663,000        254,776,750
                                   -------------------------------------
      Combined Total Project
       Funding in bill............               955,439,750
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Small Business Administration account includes 
congressionally directed spending totaling $27,726,750 for 103 
projects. The President did not request any specific projects. 
The Committee includes one congressionally directed spending 
item for the District of Columbia and one for the Department of 
the Treasury. Within the funds provided for the General 
Services Administration, the President requested $680,913,000, 
of which $511,137,000 is for construction of designated Federal 
buildings and $169,776,000 is for repair of designated Federal 
buildings. The Committee includes $222,900,000 for three 
Federal building construction projects not included in the 
President's request but requested by the judiciary. Within the 
National Archives and Records Administration, the President 
requested $17,500,000 for repair of the FDR Presidential 
Library. The Committee includes funding for two drug programs 
within the Office of National Drug Control Policy that were 
requested by the President.

                     PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY

    During fiscal year 2010, for the purposes of the Balanced 
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 
99-177), as amended, with respect to appropriations contained 
in the accompanying bill, the terms ``program, project, and 
activity'' [PPA] shall mean any item for which a dollar amount 
is contained in appropriations acts (including joint 
resolutions providing continuing appropriations) or 
accompanying reports of the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports and joint 
explanatory statements of the committee of conference.

                        REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES

    The Committee includes a provision (sec. 608) establishing 
the authority of agencies to reprogram funds and the limitation 
on that authority. The provision specifically requires the 
advance approval of the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations of any proposal to reprogram funds that: (1) 
creates a new program; (2) eliminates a program, project, or 
activity [PPA]; (3) increases funds or personnel for any PPA 
for which funds have been denied or restricted by the Congress; 
(4) proposes to redirect funds that were directed in such 
reports for a specific activity to a different purpose; (5) 
augments an existing PPA in excess of $5,000,000 or 10 percent, 
whichever is less; (6) reduces an existing PPA by $5,000,000 or 
10 percent, whichever is less; or (7) creates, reorganizes, or 
restructures offices different from the congressional budget 
justifications or the table at the end of the Committee report, 
whichever is more detailed.
    The Committee retains the requirement that each agency 
submit an operating plan to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations not later than 60 days after enactment of this 
act to establish the baseline for application of reprogramming 
and transfer authorities provided in this act. Specifically, 
each agency should provide a table for each appropriation with 
columns displaying the budget request; adjustments made by 
Congress; adjustments for rescissions, if appropriate; and the 
fiscal year enacted level. The table shall delineate the 
appropriation both by object class and by PPA. The report must 
also identify items of special congressional interest.
    The Committee expects the agencies and bureaus to submit 
reprogramming requests in a timely manner and to provide a 
thorough explanation of the proposed reallocations, including a 
detailed justification of increases and reductions and the 
specific impact the proposed changes will have on the budget 
request for the following fiscal year. Except in emergency 
situations, reprogramming requests should be submitted no later 
than June 30.
    The Committee expects each agency to manage its programs 
and activities within the amounts appropriated by Congress. The 
Committee reminds agencies that reprogramming requests should 
be submitted only in the case of an unforeseeable emergency or 
a situation that could not have been anticipated when 
formulating the budget request for the current fiscal year. 
Further, the Committee notes that when a Department or agency 
submits a reprogramming or transfer request to the Committees 
on Appropriations and does not receive identical responses from 
the House and the Senate, it is the responsibility of the 
Department to reconcile the House and the Senate differences 
before proceeding, and if reconciliation is not possible, to 
consider the request to reprogram funds unapproved.

                    RELATIONSHIP WITH BUDGET OFFICES

    Through the years, the Committee has channeled most of its 
inquiries and requests for information and assistance through 
the budget offices of the various departments, agencies, 
offices, and commissions. The Committee has often pointed to 
the natural affinity and relationship between the budget 
offices and the Committee which makes such a relationship 
workable. The Committee reiterates its longstanding position 
that while the Committee reserves the right to call upon any 
office or officer in the departments, agencies, and 
commissions, the primary conjunction between the Committee and 
these entities must be through the budget offices. To help 
ensure the Committee's ability to perform its responsibilities, 
the Committee insists on having direct, unobstructed, and 
timely access to the budget offices and expects to be able to 
receive forthright and complete responses from those offices 
and their employees.

                  CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

    Budget justifications are prepared not for the use of the 
agency, but instead are the primary tool used by the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations to evaluate the resource 
requirements and fiscal needs of agencies. The Committee is 
aware that the format and presentation of budget materials is 
largely left to the agency within presentation objectives set 
forth by OMB. In fact, OMB Circular A-11, part 6 specifically 
states that the ``agency should consult with your congressional 
committees beforehand to ensure their awareness of your plans 
to modify the format of agency budget documents.'' The 
Committee expects all the budget justifications to adhere to 
this directive and provide the data needed to make appropriate 
and meaningful funding decisions.
    The Committee directs that justifications submitted with 
the fiscal year 2011 budget requests by agencies funded under 
this act must contain the customary level of detailed data and 
explanatory statements to support the appropriations requests 
at the level of detail contained in the funding table included 
at the end of the report. Among other items, agencies shall 
provide a detailed discussion of proposed new initiatives, 
proposed changes in the agency's financial plan from prior year 
enactment, and detailed data on all programs and comprehensive 
information on any office or agency restructurings. At a 
minimum, each agency must also provide adequate justification 
for funding and staffing changes for each individual office and 
materials that compare programs, projects, and activities that 
are proposed for fiscal year 2011 to the fiscal year 2010 
enacted level.
    The Committee is aware that the analytical materials 
required for review by the Committee are unique to each agency 
in this act. Therefore, the Committee expects that each agency 
will coordinate with the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations in advance on its planned presentation for its 
budget justification materials in support of the fiscal year 
2011 budget request.

                                TITLE I

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

                          Departmental Offices

                         salaries and expenses

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $278,870,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     302,388,000
Committee recommendation................................     305,712,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Departmental Offices consist of the Office of the 
Secretary and Deputy Secretary, the Office of International 
Affairs, the Office of Domestic Finance, the Office of 
Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, the Office of Tax Policy, 
the Office of Economic Policy, the Office of the General 
Counsel, the Office of Legislative Affairs, the Office of 
Public Affairs, the Office of the Treasurer, and the Office of 
Management. The Secretary of the Treasury has the primary role 
in formulating and managing the domestic and international tax 
and financial policies of the Federal Government. The 
Secretary's responsibilities funded by the Salaries and 
Expenses appropriation include: recommending and implementing 
United States domestic and international economic and tax 
policy; formulating fiscal policy; governing the fiscal 
operations of the Government; executing the Nation's financial 
sanction policies; disrupting and dismantling terrorist 
financial infrastructure; protecting the United States and 
international financial system from terrorist financing, money 
laundering, and other financial crimes; managing the public 
debt; managing international development policy; representing 
the United States on international monetary, trade and 
investment issues; overseeing Department of the Treasury 
overseas operations; and directing the administrative 
operations of the Department of the Treasury. The majority of 
the Salaries and Expenses appropriation provides resources for 
policy formulation and implementation in the areas of domestic 
and international finance, terrorist financing and financial 
crimes, tax, economic, trade, financial operations and general 
fiscal policy. This appropriation also provides resources to 
support the Secretary, policy components, and departmental 
administrative policies in financial and personnel management, 
procurement operations, and information systems and 
telecommunications.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $305,712,000 for the Salaries and 
Expenses appropriation of the Departmental Offices account of 
the Department of the Treasury for fiscal year 2010. This 
amount is $3,324,000 above the budget request and $26,842,000 
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level. Within the funds 
provided under this account, the Committee has provided 
$3,000,000 for information technology modernization; $200,000 
for official reception and representation expenses; $258,000 
for unforeseen emergencies; and $6,787,000 for the Treasury-
wide financial statement audits and other Treasury office and 
bureau audits.
    The following table compares the fiscal year 2009 enacted 
level to the fiscal year 2010 budget estimate and the 
Committee's recommendation for each office:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Fiscal year
                                                                    Fiscal year     2010 budget      Committee
                                                                   2009 enacted      estimate     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Executive direction (including General counsel).................          21,619          22,383          22,383
Economic policies and programs..................................          45,910          44,749          47,249
Financial policies and programs.................................          36,039          47,580          48,580
Terrorism and financial intelligence............................          62,098          64,611          64,611
Treasury-wide management and programs...........................          21,600          22,779          22,779
Administration..................................................          91,604         100,286         100,110
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total, Departmental offices...............................         278,870         302,388         305,712
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee recommends the following increases to the 
budget request:
    National Academy of Sciences Study (Economic Policies and 
Programs): +$1,000,000.--The Committee recommends $1,000,000 
for the Department to transfer to the National Academy of 
Sciences for a study on the long-term economic effects of the 
aging population in the United States. This demographic shift 
will impact the Nation's economic and financial state, 
affecting individuals, Government programs, such as Social 
Security and Medicare, and many economic and business sectors, 
including private mechanisms supporting retirees. The study 
will provide a basis for identifying potential policy 
recommendations for addressing the impacts of this demographic 
change.
    National Academy of Sciences Study (Economic Policies and 
Programs): +$1,500,000.--The Committee recommends $1,500,000 
for the Department to transfer to the National Academy of 
Sciences for a carbon audit of the Tax Code, as authorized by 
section 117 of the Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008 
(Public Law 110-343). The carbon audit shall consist of a 
comprehensive review of the Internal Revenue Code to identify 
the tax provisions with the largest effects on carbon and other 
greenhouse emissions and to estimate the magnitude of those 
effects.
    Office of Financial Education (Financial Policies and 
Programs): +$1,000,000.--The Committee recommends an increase 
of $1,000,000 above the budget request for the Office of 
Financial Education. The Office of Financial Education 
administers the National Financial Literacy Challenge and 
develops strategies to combat predatory lending. The Office of 
Financial Education also coordinates the efforts of the 
Financial Literacy and Education Commission, a group chaired by 
the Secretary of the Treasury and composed of representatives 
from 20 Federal departments, agencies, and commissions. The 
Commission works to improve financial literacy and education 
for people throughout the United States. The recommended 
increase shall be utilized to enhance financial education 
efforts, including to support the revision of the national 
strategy on financial literacy and the development of 
measurable goals and objectives for the Financial Literacy and 
Education Commission.
    The Committee has approved the following significant 
program increases in accordance with the budget request:
    Domestic Finance Staffing (Financial Policies and 
Programs): +$8,731,000/+26 FTE.--In order to meet current and 
future economic challenges, Treasury must maintain a vast 
expertise in complex finance and government fields. This 
funding increase is recommended to support additional staff in 
the Office of Domestic Finance. New staff shall be assigned to 
teams supporting economic research and modeling related to 
housing finance, small business and consumer issues, and 
capital markets.
    Tax Policy Staffing (Financial Policies and Programs): 
+$4,863,000/+15 FTE.--To ensure Treasury possesses capabilities 
to support rigorous analysis and implementation of revenue 
policy, the Committee recommends funding for 15 additional tax 
specialists in Treasury's Office of Tax Policy. These new tax 
specialists shall apply tax expertise in each of the following 
key areas: (1) the financial crisis; (2) the financial stimulus 
plan; (3) climate change; and (4) healthcare reform.
    Afghanistan Threat Finance Cell and International Dues 
(Terrorism and Financial Intelligence): +$790,000/+1 FTE.--
Resources are recommended to support designated Treasury staff 
for the Afghanistan Threat Finance Cell and annual dues to 
international anti-money laundering organizations.
    Management Staffing (Treasury-wide Management and Programs, 
Administration): +$3,000,000/+13 FTE.--As the Department takes 
on broader and more complex financial and fiscal issues, 
policymakers and advisors will require more support for their 
work to meet these needs. This recommended funding increase 
shall support new staff in the areas of human capital, 
information technology, and procurement policy.
    Treasury Foreign Intelligence Network [TFIN] 
(Administration): +$1,200,000/+0 FTE.--Recommended funding will 
provide ongoing Operations and Maintenance (O&M) support for 
the TFIN system, including program management, O&M managed 
services provider contractor support, telecommunications and 
circuit costs, hardware and software maintenance, and 
technology refresh.
    The Committee makes the following findings:
    Management of the Financial Crisis.--In response to the 
financial crisis, Treasury's role in the management of the 
Federal Government's financial policies has expanded 
tremendously. In September 2008, Treasury exercised new 
authority under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 
(Public Law 110-289), taking responsibility on behalf of 
taxpayers for billions of dollars previously managed by the 
Government-sponsored housing entities Fannie Mae and Freddie 
Mac. In October 2008, Congress authorized the Emergency 
Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-343, known 
commonly as the Troubled Assets Relief Program, or TARP), 
providing Treasury with the authority to utilize 
$700,000,000,000 in taxpayer funds to implement a systemic, 
comprehensive plan to stabilize financial markets. Treasury 
continues to develop policies, strategies, and recommendations 
to overhaul the current financial system in order to prevent 
future financial and economic crises.
    The Committee appreciates the Department's efforts to 
stabilize the economy during such uncertain economic and 
financial conditions. The Committee notes that the Treasury 
Office of Inspector General has identified the management of 
the Treasury's new authorities related to distressed financial 
markets as a major management challenge facing the Department. 
Under these programs, the Department has an unprecedented role 
in managing billions in taxpayer dollars. The Committee directs 
the Department to ensure that these programs are administered 
soundly and efficiently in order to minimize risks to the 
taxpayer. The Committee also directs management to maintain 
focus on the Treasury's other critical missions--including 
terrorism and financial intelligence and assistance to 
community development financial institutions--in addition to 
management of new policies and programs related to stabilizing 
the economy.
    The Committee is concerned with certain aspects of the 
Department's implementation of the TARP program. Since the 
program was authorized, TARP has evolved into 12 separate 
programs aimed at addressing different stress points in the 
market and at rebuilding a basic lending capability for 
domestic markets. The complexity of this program has created a 
communications challenge. In March 2009, the Government 
Accountability Office [GAO] reported that TARP is very poorly 
understood by Congress and the public. The Committee directs 
the Department to develop a more effective strategy for 
communicating with Congress, the public, and other stakeholders 
in accordance with GAO recommendations. The Committee also 
directs the Department to pursue more detailed reporting from 
financial entities receiving TARP funds in order to ensure 
maximum transparency of the program.
    Foreclosure Crisis.--The Committee continues to be 
concerned that the Department's strategies to reduce mortgage 
foreclosures and keep American families in their homes rely 
exclusively on voluntary actions of mortgage servicers. The 
Committee urges the Department to expand its efforts to address 
the foreclosure crisis beyond the scope of current voluntary 
programs and to keep the Committee promptly and regularly 
apprised of such efforts. The Committee directs the Department 
to provide a monthly report to the Committee on Appropriations 
on the number and value of foreclosures prevented to date under 
Treasury programs, including the number of foreclosures 
prevented by servicer and by the foreclosure mitigation 
strategy employed (principal reduction, principal forbearance, 
interest rate reduction, interest rate freeze, term extension, 
penalties reduction, overdue amount capitalization, short sale, 
deed-in-lieu, and other strategies).
    Economic Sanctions and Divestments.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $64,611,000 for Terrorism and Financial 
Intelligence programs. With these funds, the Department will 
continue to issue and enforce economic and trade sanctions 
consistent with national security and foreign policy goals. 
These sanctions are a key tool for asserting U.S. policy toward 
countries and entities under sanction. The Committee directs 
the Department to fully implement all sanctions and divestment 
measures, particularly those applicable to North Korea, Burma, 
Iran, Sudan, and Zimbabwe. The Committee directs the Department 
to promptly notify the Committee of any resource constraints 
that adversely impact the implementation of any sanctions 
program.
    Management of Capital Investments and Information 
Security.--The Treasury Office of Inspector General continues 
to cite the Department's management of capital investments and 
information security as top management challenges. Treasury is 
currently planning and managing several capital investments, 
including the transition to a new telecommunications contract; 
the implementation of enhanced information security 
requirements; repair and renovation of the Treasury Annex; and 
a modernization of systems supporting the implementation of the 
Bank Secrecy Act. The Committee recognizes efforts the 
Department has made to emphasize capital investment management 
Department-wide. The Committee directs the Department to 
continue improving the management of capital investments, 
specifically focusing on integrating all of the Department's 
bureaus into improvement efforts and institutionalizing 
improvements so that taxpayers will benefit from better 
management of future capital projects. The Committee directs 
the Office of the Chief Information Officer to ensure that 
adequate resources are devoted both to projects in the capital 
phase and to proper maintenance and modernization of existing 
systems.
    Illegal Garnishments of Federal Benefits.--The Committee is 
concerned that payments of Federal benefits, including social 
security income, veterans' benefits, and supplemental security 
income, are at risk for illegal garnishment by third-party 
collectors. While paper checks are protected, most benefits 
today are electronically deposited into bank accounts and are 
at risk of being frozen and garnished. Section 207 of the 
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 407) prohibits this practice and 
the Department is currently in the process of developing rules 
and guidance to end this practice for direct deposits of 
Federal benefits. The Committee directs the Department to 
provide a written report to the Committee on Appropriations 
within 15 days of enactment on the progress of creating 
guidelines to protect these wages.
    Agricultural Sales to Cuba.--The Committee is aware that 
the Department of the Treasury is continuing to require the 
sellers of agricultural goods and products to Cuba to receive 
cash payments in advance of shipping the goods rather than in 
advance of delivering the goods. This policy impedes U.S. sales 
since it increases the cost of doing business. The Committee 
has added a provision to the bill that stipulates that during 
fiscal year 2010 the term ``payment of cash in advance'' shall 
be interpreted as payment before the transfer of title to, and 
control of, the exported items to the Cuban purchaser. The 
Committee urges the Department of the Treasury to use its 
rulemaking authority to permanently amend the Cuban Assets 
Control Regulations and remove impediments to United States 
agricultural sales to Cuba.

        DEPARTMENT-WIDE SYSTEMS AND CAPITAL INVESTMENTS PROGRAMS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $26,975,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       9,544,000
Committee recommendation................................       9,544,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The 1997 Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act 
established this account, which is authorized to be used by or 
on behalf of Treasury bureaus at the Secretary's discretion to 
modernize business processes and increase efficiency through 
technology investments, as well as other activities that 
involve more than one Treasury bureau or Treasury's interface 
with other Government agencies.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,544,000 for 
Department-wide systems and capital investments programs 
[DSCIP]. This amount is equal to the budget request and 
$17,431,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level.
    The following table compares the Committee recommendation 
with the budget request and the fiscal year 2009 enacted 
levels.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Fiscal year
                        DSCIP Initiative                            Fiscal year     2010 budget      Committee
                                                                   2009 enacted      estimate     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Government Initiatives........................................      $2,057,000  ..............  ..............
Enterprise Content Management...................................       6,000,000  ..............  ..............
Treasury Secure Data Network....................................       4,400,000  ..............  ..............
Cyber Security--Information Security............................       3,000,000      $3,000,000      $3,000,000
Annex Repair and Renovation.....................................      11,518,000       4,544,000       4,544,000
Treasury Foreign Intelligence Network...........................  ..............       2,000,000       2,000,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................      26,975,000       9,544,000       9,544,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $26,125,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      26,700,000
Committee recommendation................................      29,700,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    As a result of the 1988 amendments to the Inspector General 
[IG] Act, the Secretary of the Treasury established the Office 
of Inspector General [OIG] in 1989.
    The OIG conducts and supervises audits, evaluations, and 
investigations designed to: (1) promote economy, efficiency, 
and effectiveness and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in 
departmental programs and operations; and (2) keep the 
Secretary and Congress fully and currently informed of problems 
and deficiencies in the administration of departmental programs 
and operations. The audit function provides program audit, 
contract audit, and financial statement audit services. 
Contract audits provide professional advice to agency 
contracting officials on accounting and financial matters 
relative to negotiation, award, administration, repricing, and 
settlement of contracts. Program audits review and audit all 
facets of agency operations. Financial statement audits assess 
whether financial statements fairly present the agency's 
financial condition and results of operations, the adequacy of 
accounting controls, and compliance with laws and regulations. 
These audits contribute significantly to improved financial 
management by helping Treasury managers identify improvements 
needed in their accounting and internal control systems. The 
evaluations function reviews program performance and issues 
critical to the mission of the Department. The investigative 
function provides for the detection and investigation of 
improper and illegal activities involving programs, personnel, 
and operations.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $29,700,000 
for salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General. 
This amount is an increase of $3,000,000 over the budget 
request and $3,575,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted 
level. Additional funds are provided to support the increased 
workload resulting from required reviews of certain bank 
failures.

           TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................    $153,083,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     149,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     152,000,000

\1\Includes $7,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration 
[TIGTA] was established by the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act 
of 1998 (Public Law 105-206). TIGTA was created to provide 
independent audit and investigative services necessary to 
improve the quality and credibility of oversight of the 
Internal Revenue Service [IRS]. Funding was first appropriated 
for this account in the fiscal year 2000 Treasury and General 
Government Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-58).
    TIGTA conducts audits, investigations, and evaluations to 
assess the operations and programs of the IRS and related 
entities, the IRS Oversight Board and the Office of Chief 
Counsel to (1) promote the economic, efficient and effective 
administration of the Nation's tax laws and to detect and deter 
fraud and abuse in IRS programs and operations; and (2) 
recommend actions to resolve fraud and other serious problems, 
abuses, and deficiencies in these programs and operations, and 
keep the Secretary and Congress fully and currently informed of 
these issues and the progress made in resolving them. TIGTA 
reviews existing and proposed legislation and regulations 
relating to the programs and operations of the IRS and related 
entities and makes recommendations concerning the impact of 
such legislation and regulations on the economy and efficiency 
in the administration of programs and operations of the IRS and 
related entities. The audit function provides program audit, 
limited contract audit, and financial audit services. Program 
audits review and audit all facets of the IRS and related 
entities in an effort to improve IRS systems and operations, 
while ensuring fair and equitable treatment of taxpayers. 
Contract audits focus on invoices/vouchers submitted to the IRS 
to determine whether charges are valid and to identify 
erroneous and improper payments. The investigative function 
provides for the detection and investigation of improper and 
illegal activities involving IRS programs and operations and 
protects the IRS and related entities against external attempts 
to corrupt or threaten the administration of the tax laws.
    January 2009 marked the 10-year anniversary of TIGTA's 
stand-up as an independent organization. Over the past decade, 
TIGTA has issued more than 1,600 final audit reports and made 
more than 4,000 recommendations to improve tax administration, 
on 3,500 of which the IRS has taken action; identified more 
than $25,000,000,000 in funds that could have been put to 
better use and $192,000,000 in questioned costs; processed more 
than 91,684 complaints; and opened 44,373 investigations, 
successfully closing more than 99 percent of such cases.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $152,000,000 
for the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. This 
amount is a decrease of $1,083,000 below the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level which included $7,000,000 in emergency funds 
under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Public Law 
111-5) and an increase of $3,000,000 above the budget request. 
The Committee appreciates the challenge TIGTA faces in adapting 
its oversight activities to address increasingly complex and 
high-risk issues associated with IRS operations, including 
detection and investigation of fraud and electronic crime, 
review of procurement activities, and safeguarding of taxpayer 
privacy. In recognition of the resource demands, the Committee 
provides an additional $3,000,000 above the budget request to 
support TIGTA's work.
    The Committee commends TIGTA for its ongoing review of the 
IRS's business systems modernization program and other 
information technology projects. The Committee also 
acknowledges the critical importance of the priorities TIGTA 
has identified for fiscal year 2010, including adapting to the 
IRS's continuously evolving operations and mitigating 
intensified risks associated with modernization, security, 
addressing the tax gap, and human capital challenges facing the 
IRS. In addition, TIGTA plays a pivotal role in responding to 
threats and attacks against IRS employees, property, and 
sensitive information. The Committee shares TIGTA's ongoing 
concern that the IRS is developing and launching its modernized 
systems without adequately contemplating the security 
implications. The Committee urges continued TIGTA oversight of 
tax gap issues, including data reliability, tax law 
enforcement, and taxpayer assistance, to ensure that the IRS 
enhances voluntary compliance by balancing taxpayer services 
and enforcement without jeopardizing taxpayer rights.

                  Financial Crimes Enforcement Network


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $91,465,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     102,760,000
Committee recommendation................................     104,260,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN], a bureau 
within the Treasury Department's Office of Terrorism and 
Financial Intelligence, is the largest overt collector of 
financial intelligence in the United States. FinCEN's mission 
is to safeguard the financial system from the abuses of 
financial crime, including terrorist financing, money 
laundering, and other illicit activity. FinCEN accomplishes its 
mission by administering the Bank Secrecy Act, a collection of 
statutes that form the Nation's anti-money laundering/counter-
terrorist financing regulatory regime. As the delegated 
administrator of the Bank Secrecy Act, FinCEN is responsible 
for the development and implementation of regulations, rules, 
and guidance issued under the Bank Secrecy Act. FinCEN also 
oversees the work of eight Federal agencies that have been 
delegated responsibility to examine various sectors of the 
financial industry for compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act's 
requirements. FinCEN is responsible for collecting, 
maintaining, and disseminating the information reported by 
financial institutions under the Bank Secrecy Act through a 
Government-wide access service. FinCEN is the United States' 
Financial Intelligence Unit [FIU] and a founding member of the 
Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units. As the United 
States' FIU, FinCEN routinely shares information and cooperates 
with other FIUs around the world to address the global problems 
of terrorist financing, money laundering, and other illicit 
activity.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $104,260,000 for the Financial 
Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN]. This amount is $12,795,000 
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $1,500,000 above 
the budget request.
    The Committee recommends the following program increases 
for fiscal year 2010:
    Information Technology Modernization: +$10,000,000/+1 
FTE.--The Committee recommends an increase of $10,000,000 above 
the fiscal year 2009 enacted level to support FinCEN's efforts 
to modernize the technical environment for implementation of 
the Bank Secrecy Act [BSA] in accordance with the budget 
request. The modernization will re-engineer the BSA data 
architecture, update antiquated infrastructure required to 
support data capture and dissemination, implement innovative 
web services and enhanced electronic filing, and provide 
enhanced analytical tools.
    The Committee is pleased that FinCEN has requested funding 
to begin a comprehensive modernization of the main information 
technology infrastructure supporting BSA implementation. This 
system is used by banks, Federal law enforcement, state and 
local law enforcement, and other Federal intelligence agencies 
to report, gather, and analyze data to identify money 
laundering, terrorist financing, tax evasion, and 
vulnerabilities in the financial industry. The current 
infrastructure is outdated and limits the capabilities of these 
users, which ultimately limits the capability of the Treasury 
and its partners to pursue money laundering, terrorist 
financing, and tax evasion.
    The Committee notes that FinCEN's most recent attempt to 
modernize BSA infrastructure, BSA Direct Retrieval and Sharing, 
ultimately failed, costing the taxpayers over $14,000,000. The 
Committee is pleased with the steps FinCEN has taken to 
strengthen its acquisition and project management competencies 
and directs the agency to continue to pursue employee education 
and training efforts in this area, including training on proper 
budget execution practices. The Committee also directs FinCEN 
to place a top priority on contractor oversight and on 
involving its wide variety of stakeholders in the development 
of the modernized system. FinCEN is directed to submit a 
semiannual report to the Committee on Appropriations 
summarizing the agency's progress regarding the modernization 
effort, including milestones planned and achieved, progress on 
cost and schedule, management of contractor oversight, 
strategies to involve stakeholders, and acquisition management 
efforts.
    The Committee also directs FinCEN to focus efforts on 
improving the completeness and reliability of BSA data in 
accordance with recommendations by the Treasury Inspector 
General and the Government Accountability Office. The Committee 
notes that while a new BSA infrastructure will improve the 
capabilities of processing and analyzing BSA data, the 
accuracy, reliability, and timeliness of the data itself will 
ultimately determine the effectiveness of the system and 
related processes.
    Strengthen Global Anti-money Laundering Efforts: 
+$1,500,000.--The Committee recommends an increase of 
$1,500,000 above the budget request for FinCEN to improve 
collaboration with other Financial Intelligence Units around 
the world regarding international anti-money laundering and 
terrorist financing and for FinCEN to help other Financial 
Intelligence Units around the world to build and strengthen 
investigative and analytical capabilities. The Committee notes 
that while system and data improvements will enhance the 
capabilities of domestic efforts, communicating and 
collaborating effectively with global partners is also a 
critical component of combating terrorist financing and money 
laundering both domestically and abroad.

                        Treasury Forfeiture Fund


                              (RESCISSION)

    The Committee recommends a rescission of $50,000,000 of 
unobligated balances in the Treasury Forfeiture Fund.

                      Financial Management Service


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $239,785,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     244,132,000
Committee recommendation................................     244,132,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    In 1940, the Department of the Treasury established the 
Fiscal Service, which consisted of the Bureau of Accounts, the 
Bureau of the Public Debt, and the Office of the Treasurer. A 
1974 reorganization of the Fiscal Service created the Bureau of 
Government Financial Operations, which was formed from a merger 
of the Bureau of Accounts and most functions of the Office of 
the Treasurer. In 1984, the Bureau of Government Financial 
Operations was renamed the Financial Management Service [FMS].
    FMS implements payment policy and procedures for Federal 
agencies, issues and distributes payments, promotes the use of 
electronics in the payment process, and assists agencies in 
converting payments from paper checks to electronic funds 
transfer [EFT]. FMS provides debt collection operational 
services to client agencies, implements collections policy, 
regulations, standards, and procedures for the Federal 
Government, and assists agencies in converting collections from 
paper to electronic media.
    FMS provides financial accounting, reporting, and financing 
services to the Federal Government and the Government's agents 
who participate in the payments and collections process by 
generating a series of daily, monthly, quarterly, and annual 
Government-wide reports. FMS also works directly with agencies 
to help reconcile reporting differences.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $244,132,000 for salaries and 
expenses for FMS. This amount is the same as the budget request 
and $4,347,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level.
    Hundreds of Federal agencies accept credit and debit cards 
as payment for goods and services provided by the Federal 
Government. FMS provides a centralized card acquiring service 
for the majority of these agencies. The Committee is concerned 
that the Federal Government may be paying excessive interchange 
and other fees on these transactions and that rules issued by 
the card networks may work against the best interests of the 
taxpayer. GAO reported that credit card interchange fees and 
merchant discount fees cost the Federal Government over 
$400,000,000 in fiscal year 2007 (GAO-08-558). GAO found that 
Federal entities have often been unable to effectively 
negotiate changes in the rates and fees they are charged. The 
Committee directs FMS to report to the Committee on 
Appropriations within 180 days of enactment on the potential 
cost savings and other benefits to the Federal Government if 
FMS were able to effectively negotiate (1) changes in the rates 
and fees assessed by card networks and (2) modifications to the 
rules and regulations of the card networks which restrict the 
Federal Government's ability to determine the types of card 
payments it accepts and the methods by which its transactions 
are processed.

                Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $99,065,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     105,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     103,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Homeland Security Act created the Alcohol and Tobacco 
Tax and Trade Bureau [TTB] within the Department of the 
Treasury and charged TTB with collecting revenue and protecting 
the public.
    TTB enforces certain Federal laws and regulations relating 
to alcohol and tobacco. TTB works directly and in cooperation 
with others to maintain a sound revenue management and 
collection system that continues to reduce the regulatory 
burden, improve service, collect the revenue due, and prevent 
tax evasion and other criminal conduct. TTB is also responsible 
for preventing consumer deception, ensuring that regulated 
products comply with Federal commodity, safety, and 
distribution requirements, and providing customer service.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $103,000,000 for TTB for fiscal 
year 2009. This amount is a decrease of $2,000,000 to the 
budget request and an increase of $3,935,000 over the fiscal 
year 2009 enacted level. The Committee does not recommend 
assessing fees on producers, distributors, and retailers of 
alcohol in order to offset TTB's operating costs, as proposed 
in the budget. The recommended funding level for TTB is 
decreased by the cost assumed in the budget for implementing 
the proposed collections.

                           United States Mint


               UNITED STATES MINT PUBLIC ENTERPRISE FUND

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The United States Mint manufactures coins, sells numismatic 
and investment products, and provides for security and asset 
protection. Public Law 104-52 established the U.S. Mint Public 
Enterprise Fund (the Fund). The Fund encompasses the previous 
Salaries and Expenses, Coinage Profit Fund, Coinage Metal Fund, 
and the Numismatic Public Enterprise Fund. The Mint submits 
annual audited business-type financial statements to the 
Secretary of the Treasury and to Congress in support of the 
operations of the revolving fund.
    The operations of the Mint are divided into two major 
activities: Manufacturing and sales (including circulating 
coinage and numismatic and investment products); and 
protection. The Mint is credited with receipts from its 
circulating coinage operations, equal to the full cost of 
producing and distributing coins that are put into circulation, 
including depreciation of the Mint's plant and equipment on the 
basis of current replacement value. Those receipts pay for the 
costs of the Mint's operations, which include the costs of 
production and distribution. The difference between the face 
value of the coins and these costs is a profit, which is 
deposited as seigniorage to the general fund. In fiscal year 
2008, the Mint transferred $750,000,000 to the general fund. 
Any seigniorage used to finance the Mint's capital acquisitions 
is recorded as budget authority in the year that funds are 
obligated for this purpose and as receipts over the life of the 
asset.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a spending level of $26,700,000 
for circulating coinage and protective service capital 
investments for the Mint. This amount is a decrease of 
$15,450,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and is 
equal to the budget request.

                       Bureau of the Public Debt


                     ADMINISTERING THE PUBLIC DEBT

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $177,352,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     182,244,000
Committee recommendation................................     182,244,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Public Debt Service was formed in 1919 with the 
appointment of the first Commissioner of the Public Debt. The 
Public Debt Service took general charge of debt operations 
including debt accounting and securities issue and retirement, 
which had been conducted by several independent divisions 
within the Treasury. Acting under the authorization of the 
Reorganization Act of 1939, the President created the Bureau of 
the Public Debt, which was established as part of the Fiscal 
Service in the Department of the Treasury effective June 30, 
1940 (31 U.S.C. 306). In 1993, the Savings Bonds Division, a 
separate organization, was made part of the Bureau.
    This appropriation provides funds for the conduct of all 
public debt operations and the promotion of the sale of U.S. 
savings-type securities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $182,244,000 for the Bureau of the 
Public Debt for fiscal year 2010. This amount is an increase of 
$4,892,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and is 
equal to the budget request.

           Community Development Financial Institutions Fund


   COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................    $207,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     243,600,000
Committee recommendation................................     246,750,000

\1\Includes $100,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund makes 
investments in the form of grants, loans, equity investments, 
deposits, and technical assistance grants to new and existing 
community development financial institutions [CDFIs] through 
the CDFI program. CDFIs include community development banks, 
credit unions, venture capital funds, revolving loan funds, and 
microloan funds, among others. Recipient institutions engage in 
lending and investment for affordable housing, small business, 
and community development within underserved communities. The 
CDFI Fund administers the Bank Enterprise Award [BEA] Program, 
which provides a financial incentive to insured depository 
institutions to undertake community development financing 
activities. The CDFI Fund also administers the New Markets Tax 
Credit Program, a program that provides an incentive to 
investors in the form of a tax credit, which is expected to 
stimulate private community and economic development 
activities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $166,750,000 for the CDFI Fund, 
which is $40,250,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, 
which included funding provided in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5), and $3,150,000 
above the budget request.
    The Committee recommends a set-aside of $12,000,000 for 
grants, loans, and technical assistance and training programs 
to benefit Native American, Alaskan Natives, and Native 
Hawaiian communities in the coordination of development 
strategies, increased access to equity investments, and loans 
for development activities.
    Of funding recommended for the CDFI Fund, $3,150,000 is 
provided for a pilot program to be conducted in Hawaii for 
financial education and pre-home ownership counseling as 
authorized in section 1132(d) of division A of the Housing and 
Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-289). The 
National Low Income Housing Coalition ranked Hawaii as the most 
expensive State for housing. As credit has become more 
difficult to obtain, working families in Hawaii need assistance 
to better prepare for purchasing a home. Services in the pilot 
program will include credit counseling, assisting with savings 
planning, and educating potential home buyers about mortgage 
products and available programs supporting home ownership.
    The Committee understands that many CDFIs are experiencing 
difficulty obtaining non-Federal funding due to the economic 
downturn. The Committee recommends continuing the temporary 
waiver of matching fund requirements for CDFI programs so that 
CDFIs can continue to invest in and assist underserved 
communities during the economic crisis. The Committee intends 
to reinstate matching fund requirements when capital markets 
return to normal function.
    In addition to funding recommended for the CDFI Fund, 
$80,000,000 is recommended for the Capital Magnet Fund as 
requested in the budget. Funding was not provided for the 
Capital Magnet Fund in fiscal year 2009. The Capital Magnet 
Fund is authorized in the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 
2008 (Public Law 110-289). Under that act, the Government-
sponsored entities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are required to 
contribute funding to the Capital Magnet Fund in order to 
support affordable housing projects. In November 2008, the 
Federal Housing Finance Agency directed Fannie Mae and Freddie 
Mac to suspend their contributions until further notice, 
temporarily leaving the Capital Magnet Fund without a funding 
stream. The recommendation of $80,000,000 temporarily funds the 
Capital Magnet Fund in lieu of contributions from Fannie Mae 
and Freddie Mac and provides for a temporary change in the 
leverage expectations for grants made under the program during 
fiscal year 2010. The Committee intends the funding to provide 
start-up capital for the Capital Magnet Fund and fully expects 
that the Capital Magnet Fund will operate without additional 
appropriations in the future when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac 
resume the required contributions.

                    Bureau of Engraving and Printing


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Bureau of Engraving and Printing [BEP] has been the 
sole manufacturer of U.S. paper currency for almost 150 years. 
The origin of the BEP is traced to an act of Congress passed on 
February 25, 1862, 12 Stat. 345, authorizing the Secretary of 
the Treasury to issue a new currency--United States notes. 
While this law was the cornerstone authority for the operations 
of the engraving and printing division of the Treasury for many 
years, it was not until an Act of June 20, 1874, 18 Stat. 100, 
that the Congress first referred to this division as the 
``Bureau of Engraving and Printing.'' The Bureau's status as a 
distinct bureau within the Department of the Treasury was 
solidified by section 1 of the Act of June 4, 1897, 30 Stat. 
18, which placed all of the business of the BEP under the 
immediate control of a director, subject to the direction of 
the Secretary of the Treasury. The 1897 law is now codified in 
31 U.S.C. 303.
    The BEP designs, manufactures, and supplies Federal Reserve 
notes and other security documents issued by the Federal 
Government.
    The operations of the BEP are currently financed by means 
of a revolving fund established in accordance with the 
provisions of Public Law 656, August 4, 1950 (31 U.S.C. 181), 
which requires the BEP to be reimbursed by customer agencies 
for all costs of manufacturing products and services performed. 
The BEP is also authorized to assess amounts to acquire capital 
equipment and provide for working capital needs.
    No direct appropriation is required to cover the activities 
of the BEP.

                        Internal Revenue Service


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Internal Revenue Service [IRS] administers the Nation's 
tax laws and collects the revenue that funds over 96 percent of 
the Federal Government's operations and public services. The 
IRS's mission is to provide taxpayers with quality service by 
helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and 
by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all. The 
IRS focuses its enforcement programs toward increasing 
voluntary tax compliance by deterring taxpayers inclined to 
evade their tax obligations while vigorously pursuing those who 
violate the law. Each year, IRS employees deal directly with 
more American taxpayers than any other institution, public or 
private.
    During fiscal year 2008, the IRS collected more than 
$2,300,000,000,000 in revenue, net of refunds, and processed 
more than 250 million tax returns. More than 101.5 million 
returns, including 58 percent of individual returns were filed 
electronically. Also, in fiscal year 2008, the IRS customer 
assistance call centers answered 40.4 million assistor 
telephone calls and 52 million automated calls. There were 
nearly 7 million contacts at the 401 taxpayer assistance 
centers, and over 347 million visits to the IRS website, an 
increase of 61 percent over fiscal year 2007. In addition to 
serving taxpayers during the regular filing season, the IRS 
delivered $94,300,000,000 in economic stimulus payments to 
116.2 million taxpayers. An important focus for the IRS in 
recent years has been to undertake a major modernization of its 
systems, including expanding its Internet services, and 
business operations to better serve taxpayers and enforce the 
law.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $12,152,445,000 for the Internal 
Revenue Service for fiscal year 2010. This is an increase of 
$549,847,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and 
$26,445,000 above the budget request. The Committee supports 
the requested additional funding, and expects the IRS to devote 
these resources to reducing the tax gap by investing in a 
strong compliance program and initiatives to address 
international tax evasion, as well as needed upgrades to IRS 
information technology systems to streamline tax 
administration, protect taxpayer information, and replace aging 
infrastructure.
    Tax Gap.--The vast majority of Americans pay their fair 
share of taxes, yet there is still a ``tax gap.'' The tax gap 
is the difference between what taxpayers are supposed to pay 
and what they actually do pay. In its update of the results of 
a 3-year study, the IRS found that for tax year 2001, about 84 
percent of owed taxes were paid voluntarily and timely. 
However, a significant number of taxpayers do not comply with 
the Tax Code resulting in an estimated gross tax gap of 
$345,000,000,000. The IRS estimates that after enforcement and 
other late payments are factored into the gross tax gap, the 
net tax gap is about $290,000,000,000. The most current 
estimate of the tax gap remains largely unchanged from the 
IRS's initial update conducted in 2006, and has remained 
relatively stable for the past three decades based on previous 
IRS studies. The accuracy of the tax gap, however, is uncertain 
given the use of outdated and incomplete information and 
questionable methodology. Some experts, including the GAO and 
TIGTA, believe that the tax gap may actually be higher than 
estimated by the IRS. The Committee strongly believes that the 
IRS can and must reduce the tax gap if the IRS is given 
additional resources and is able to improve its operational 
capabilities (most notably through the Business Systems 
Modernization program).
    To reduce the tax gap, experts recommend a number of 
approaches. These include: improving information reporting, 
improving taxpayer services, increasing research on 
noncompliance, improving the partnership between the IRS and 
the tax administration community, and leveraging technology to 
improve IRS's systems. The Committee supports all of these 
approaches in combination.
    The Committee acknowledges the Department of the Treasury 
and the IRS's August 2007 publication, ``Reducing the Tax Gap: 
A Report on Improving Voluntary Compliance.'' The Committee 
shares the concern that the steps outlined in that report are 
preliminary, and that absent a better understanding of the 
current sources of noncompliance, efforts to improve compliance 
may be hampered, misdirected, and difficult to measure. To gain 
meaningful insights into taxpayer behavior, the Committee 
strongly supports the work of the National Research Program.
    Operating Plan and Notification.--In addition to the normal 
operating plan requirements detailed in the introduction in 
this report, the Committee directs the IRS to include details 
on any planned reorganization, job reductions or increases to 
offices or activities within the agency, and modifications to 
any service or enforcement activity. The Committee also directs 
the IRS to obtain and include comments of the IRS Oversight 
Board as part of its operating plan submission to the 
Committee. Further, the IRS should promptly notify the 
Committee and the IRS Oversight Board of any substantial 
changes to these plans.
    The Committee remains concerned about any efforts to reduce 
specific taxpayer services, including face-to-face services. 
Therefore, the Committee directs that if the IRS proposes 
reductions in taxpayer services, such reductions must be 
consistent with the budget justification, operating plan, and 
Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint, and the IRS must demonstrate 
that such reductions will not result in a decline in voluntary 
compliance. Where such reductions involve a reduction in face-
to-face service, the IRS must demonstrate that the proposed 
reductions do not adversely impact compliance by taxpayers who 
are dependent on such services, by showing, through such means 
as a successful pilot program, survey, or other empirical 
study, that there is an effective and viable service 
alternative available.
    IRS Staffing Plans.--The Committee continues to support 
adequate staffing levels for effective tax administration and 
supports the staffing plans for the IRS facilities in the 
communities of Martinsburg and Beckley, West Virginia. 
Therefore, the Committee urges the IRS, within the constraints 
of the fiscal year 2010 funding levels, to make no staffing 
reductions at the Martinsburg National Computing Center and the 
programmed level at the Finance Center in Beckley, West 
Virginia. Further, the Committee directs the IRS to provide an 
annual report to the Committee on its efforts to protect and 
increase staffing levels at the Martinsburg and Beckley IRS 
facilities.
    Taxpayer Services in Alaska and Hawaii.--Given the remote 
distance of Alaska and Hawaii from the U.S. mainland and the 
difficulty experienced by Alaska and Hawaii taxpayers in 
receiving needed tax assistance by the national toll-free line, 
it is imperative that the Taxpayer Advocate Service Center in 
each of these States is fully staffed and capable of resolving 
taxpayer problems of the most complex nature. The Committee 
directs the IRS to continue to staff each Taxpayer Advocate 
Service Center in each of these States with a Collection 
Technical Advisor and an Examination Technical Advisor in 
addition to the current complement of office staff.

                           TAXPAYER SERVICES

Appropriations, 2009....................................  $2,293,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   2,269,830,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,275,830,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Taxpayer Services appropriation provides for taxpayer 
services, including forms and publications; processing tax 
returns and related documents; filing and account services; 
taxpayer advocacy services; and assisting taxpayers to 
understand their tax obligations, correctly file their returns, 
and pay taxes due in a timely manner.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $2,275,830,000 for Taxpayer 
Services, which is $17,170,000 below the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level, and $6,000,000 above the budget request. The 
Committee notes that Congress provided direct funding to the 
Secretary of the Treasury for IRS implementation of the tax 
provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 
(Public Law 111-5) and that those funds are not reflected in 
the ``Taxpayer Services'' account. Bill language is included 
providing not less than $6,100,000 for the tax counseling for 
the elderly program, not less than $9,500,000 for low-income 
taxpayer clinic grants, not less than $12,000,000, to be 
available for 2 years, for a community volunteer income tax 
assistance matching grant program for tax return preparation 
assistance and $205,954,000 for the Taxpayer Advocate Service.
    The Committee strongly believes that ``Service + 
Enforcement = Compliance'' and that, as outlined in the IRS 
Strategic Plan 2009-2013, the IRS must improve service to make 
voluntary compliance easier.
    Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint.--In response to the 
Committee's directive in the fiscal year 2006 Treasury 
Appropriations Act, the IRS, in consultation with the IRS 
Oversight Board and the National Taxpayer Advocate, developed a 
``Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint'' to institute a 5-year 
strategic plan for taxpayer services. The Committee expects the 
IRS, the IRS Oversight Board, and the National Taxpayer 
Advocate to work collaboratively to make the Taxpayer 
Assistance Blueprint an integral and guiding component of 
delivering services. The Committee supports ongoing efforts to 
conduct research on taxpayer needs and taxpayer service 
performance.
    The Committee directs the IRS, the IRS Oversight Board, and 
the National Taxpayer Advocate to submit to Congress annual 
updates to the Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint identifying any 
changes to its strategic plan for taxpayer service, including 
the results of any new research and relevant findings, and any 
open issues requiring additional research.
    E-Filing.--The Committee is heartened by the IRS's improved 
performance in increasing the number of tax filers who submit 
their returns electronically and without additional cost. 
Electronic filing benefits taxpayers and promotes effective tax 
administration because it decreases processing errors, 
expedites processing and payment of refunds, and allows the IRS 
to efficiently maintain up-to-date records. A total of 89.6 
million individual tax returns were filed electronically during 
the 2008 filing season, representing more than 63 percent of 
all returns. The Committee directs the IRS, in consultation 
with stakeholders, including the National Taxpayer Advocate, to 
implement a strategy to achieve an 80 percent e-file goal. This 
plan should address alternate electronic filing strategies, 
including Telefile and 2-D bar coding and methods of e-filing 
directly with the IRS for free as well as any impediments or 
circumstances that affect taxpayers inclinations toward 
electronic filing.
    The Committee believes that the IRS will deliver better 
taxpayer service, achieve improved compliance, and reduce the 
tax gap if taxpayer behavior is better understood and applied 
research is integrated into the development of taxpayer service 
and enforcement initiatives. Toward that end, the Committee 
supports the work of the National Taxpayer Advocate and the IRS 
Office of Research to examine factors that influence taxpayer 
compliance behavior, including how and the extent to which 
various factors influence such behavior, and how the 
establishment of a cognitive learning and applied research 
laboratory might facilitate continued evaluation.
    EITC.--The Committee is concerned that many low-income 
taxpayers and their families are having their Earned Income Tax 
Credit [EITC] benefits unnecessarily diminished through high-
cost, short-term products such as refund anticipation loans 
[RALs]. The Committee directs the IRS, in consultation with the 
National Taxpayer Advocate, to educate consumers about the 
costs associated with these products and expand access to 
alternative methods of obtaining timely tax refunds.
    Community Volunteer Income Tax Assistance.--The Volunteer 
Income Tax Assistance [VITA] program is an important aspect of 
IRS efforts to provide income tax preparation assistance 
programs for low-income taxpayers. The Committee provides that, 
within funds provided, $12,000,000 shall be available for 2 
years for exclusive use as part of continuing a matching grant 
program established and administered by the IRS, in 
consultation with the Taxpayer Advocate Service, for not for 
profit organizations which provide volunteer income tax return 
preparation services for lower income individual taxpayers.
    This program shall provide direct funds to enable VITA 
programs to extend services to underserved populations and 
hardest-to-reach areas, both urban and nonurban, as well as to 
increase the capacity to file returns electronically, heighten 
quality control, enhance training of volunteers, and 
significantly improve the accuracy rate of returns prepared by 
VITA sites. The Committee reinforces its expectation that the 
IRS should employ an equitable selection methodology which 
takes into account geographic diversity, and include an 
evaluation component to measure the overall effectiveness of 
the program and the results achieved.
    The IRS is not permitted to treat any in-kind contributions 
from the IRS as counting toward the $12,000,000 appropriation 
nor shall the IRS reduce any current contributions toward tax 
return preparation services.
    In addition, the Committee notes that 1 in 5 adults living 
in the United States have a disability, and that over 22 
million families nationwide have a member with a disability. 
Only 21 percent of taxpayers with disabilities have annual 
incomes over $40,000, and working-age adults with disabilities 
are 3 times more likely than their nondisabled peers to live at 
or below the poverty line. Prior research has identified 
persons with disabilities as a major underserved market segment 
for receiving support from national low-income tax assistance 
programs, asset building coalitions, and the private sector 
financial services.
    The Committee understands that only a small number of the 
grants awarded thus far within the VITA Community Matching 
Grant Assistance program have focused on reaching taxpayers 
with disabilities as the primary target subpopulation. The 
Committee strongly urges the IRS to make every effort to expand 
the quantity and funding level of VITA grants focused on 
serving persons with disabilities proportional to the growing 
disability population requiring tax assistance.
    The Committee understands that entities that are currently 
increasing their outreach efforts to better serve the needs of 
the disability population have experienced difficulty in 
applying for Federal grant assistance due to a lack of 
resources at the local level needed to complete the 
application. The Committee urges the IRS to allow national 
coalitions responsible for the coordination of local community 
partnerships focused specifically on the expanded provision of 
tax services for individuals with disabilities to compete in 
future VITA community matching grant processes.
    Charitable Exempt Organizations.--The Committee is 
encouraged by recent IRS actions to invest greater resources in 
activities that educate charitable exempt organizations about 
their obligations under the Tax Code, helping to increase 
voluntary compliance and strengthen charities' ability to 
improve lives and communities. The Committee anticipates that 
the IRS will utilize the increased resources in this 
appropriation to continue to expand outreach to and education 
of charitable organizations, particularly in light of 
significant changes to tax-exempt laws in the Pension 
Protection Act and other statutes.
    IRS Free File Program.--The Free File Program allows 
taxpayers meeting certain income requirements to electronically 
prepare and file their income tax returns free of charge. The 
IRS administers the Program as a partnership with the Free File 
Alliance, a consortium of tax software companies. The Committee 
has had long-standing concern that eligible taxpayers are not 
taking full advantage of this program. The Committee expects 
the IRS to place a high priority on improving marketing and 
administration of the program as outlined by TIGTA. The IRS 
should promote public awareness of the availability of this 
program among those who can most benefit from its free 
services, particularly lower income, disadvantaged, the working 
poor and other underserved populations.

                              ENFORCEMENT

Appropriations, 2009....................................  $5,117,267,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   5,504,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   5,504,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Enforcement appropriation provides for the examination 
of tax returns, both domestic and international; the 
administrative and judicial settlement of taxpayer appeals of 
examination findings; technical rulings; monitoring employee 
pension plans; determining qualifications of organizations 
seeking tax-exempt status; examining tax returns of exempt 
organizations; enforcing statutes relating to detection and 
investigation of criminal violations of the internal revenue 
laws; identifying underreporting of tax obligations; securing 
unfiled tax returns; and collecting unpaid accounts.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request level of 
$5,504,000,000 for enforcement activities for fiscal year 2010. 
This amount is $386,733,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted 
level and the same as the budget request. Bill language is 
included to transfer not less than $59,206,000 to the 
Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement [ICDE] program and to 
transfer up to $10,000,000 from the Enforcement account to the 
Operations Support account to support the ICDE program.
    The Committee fully supports the IRS's proposed use of the 
funding increase to promote compliance with U.S. international 
tax provisions and to address the tax gap attributable to 
international transactions. The Committee is cognizant of the 
trends in the international tax arena, specifically that (1) 
the number of multinational enterprises increased by twentyfold 
from 3,000 in 1990 to well over 63,000 in 2007, (2) the number 
of filings containing international features has increased by 
87 percent in the brief span of 2002 to 2007, (3) technology 
has eased the ability of small- to mid-sized businesses to 
complete globally, and (4) low-tax and no-tax jurisdiction 
countries are home to 58 percent of the foreign profits of U.S. 
multinational corporations.
    It is against that backdrop that the IRS will, with the 
increased resources supporting 784 additional FTE, be equipped 
to launch a robust package of 6 enforcement initiatives. These 
include improving identification and coverage of international 
issues and increased issue specialization to address complex 
international transactions; increasing coverage of smaller 
international businesses and individuals; increasing reporting 
compliance of domestic taxpayers with offshore activity by 
doubling the number of criminal investigation attaches in 
foreign ports of duty; furthering national law enforcement and 
counterterrorism objectives; expanding IRS's international 
presence in the tax-exempt and government sectors, including 
discovery and investigation of offshore tax shelters used by 
pension plans; and increasing compliance efforts, through more 
rigorous automated matching and reconciliation of documents 
regarding foreign person's U.S.-sourced income.
    The IRS has projected a substantial return on investment to 
be realized over the next 3 years from these initiatives. The 
Committee shares the concerns outlined by the Government 
Accountability Office [GAO] that the IRS needs to be prepared 
to monitor, document, and report on the extent to which the 
projected revenue forecasts actually yield the intended 
results. The Committee strongly believes that evaluating what 
occurs as a result of these targeted investments would be a 
helpful indicator of success and useful in making future 
spending decisions and resource allocation plans. The Committee 
directs the IRS to provide the Committees on Appropriations 
with detailed information about the actual costs, revenues, and 
return on investment after the first and successive years of 
the implementation of the new enforcement initiatives.
    National Research Program.--As noted previously, the 
Committee strongly supports the work of the National Research 
Program [NRP] to increase understanding of the tax gap. While 
the IRS's NRP has done a commendable job in updating the tax 
gap estimates, significant challenges remain in obtaining 
complete and timely data and in developing reliable methods for 
interpreting the data. The IRS and others have expressed 
concerns with the certainty of the overall tax gap estimate in 
part because some aspects of the estimate rely on data from the 
1970s and 1980s and in other areas, no estimates are available. 
The Committee agrees with GAO, TIGTA, the National Taxpayer 
Advocate, and the IRS Oversight Board, which have all 
recommended greater and more frequent data collection and 
studies of the tax gap including the portion of the tax gap 
attibutable to international transactions.
    Leveraging Preparer Community.--The Committee believes that 
an understanding of the causes of inadvertent noncompliance and 
the role of preparers in facilitating both inadvertent and 
intentional noncompliance will improve tax administration and 
help guide IRS's allocation of resources. The Committee is 
encouraged by the IRS's focused efforts to study and identify 
how to better leverage the tax preparer community to increase 
taxpayer compliance. With over 80 percent of taxpayers using 
either a tax return preparer or third-party software to 
complete their returns, it is paramount that the IRS ensure 
that the professionals who assist taxpayers adhere to uniform 
and high ethical standards of conduct.
    Misclassification of Contractors.--The Committee continues 
to be highly concerned with the misclassification of workers as 
independent contractors, who file using IRS Form 1099. Many of 
these workers should be correctly classified as employees and 
should file using W-2 forms. This misclassification leads to 
the underreporting and underpayment of employment and payroll 
taxes by employers and individuals, which accounts for a 
substantial portion of the gross tax gap. Therefore, the 
Committee strongly urges the IRS to provide increased tax 
enforcement in industries where misclassification of employees 
is widespread.
    Global Tax Administration Issues.--The bill includes 
$126,500 as a 1-year payment to support the IRS's role as host 
in the United States for the annual meeting of the Leeds Castle 
Group during 2010. In 2006, the IRS and the tax administrations 
of nine other countries agreed to the establishment of the so-
called ``Leeds Castle Group''. Under this arrangement, the 
commissioners of the revenue bodies of Australia, Canada, 
China, France, Germany, India, Japan, South Korea, the United 
Kingdom, and the United States agreed to meet regularly to 
consider and discuss issues of global and national tax 
administration in their respective countries, particularly 
mutual compliance challenges.

                           OPERATIONS SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2009....................................  $3,867,011,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   4,082,984,000
Committee recommendation................................   4,082,984,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Operations Support appropriation provides for overall 
planning and direction of the IRS including shared service 
support related to facilities services, rent payments, 
printing, postage, and security; other support functions that 
are considered overhead but essential to the successful 
operation of IRS programs including resources for headquarters 
management activities, including IRS-wide support for strategic 
planning, communications and liaison, finance, human resources, 
EEO and diversity; research and statistics of income; and 
necessary expenses for information systems and 
telecommunication support, including developmental information 
systems and operational information systems.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $4,082,984,000 for Operations 
Support for fiscal year 2010. This amount is $215,973,000 above 
the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget 
request. Bill language is included allowing up to $75,000,000 
of these funds to remain available until September 30, 2011, 
for information technology support and not to exceed $1,000,000 
to remain available until September 30, 2012, for research; not 
less than $2,000,000 for the Internal Revenue Oversight Board; 
and $25,000 for official reception and representation expenses.
    Information Technology [IT] Management and Oversight.--The 
IRS has made significant strides in improving the management 
and oversight of its business systems modernization [BSM] 
program. The IRS needs to vigilantly address major systemic 
problems with its non-BSM portfolio of information technology 
projects. TIGTA has identified problems in several areas of IT 
management and oversight including, but not limited to, such 
areas as classification of investment projects, oversight and 
governance structure, risk management, contingency planning, 
and contractor performance and accountability.
    The Committee expects the IRS to monitor its entire non-BSM 
IT portfolio (regardless of tier classification) and make any 
changes as necessary to ensure that each project has (1) been 
properly classified for investment decision and management 
purposes, (2) the appropriate governance structure in place 
(such as an executive steering committee), (3) a risk 
management plan, (4) a contingency plan in case of breakdowns 
or failures in scheduled deliverables, (5) adequate provisions 
in the contracts to ensure penalties and repayment to the 
agency if performance is not met, (6) adequate contractor 
staffing and management in place to fulfill the contract terms 
and deliverables, and (7) been certified by the head of the 
relevant IRS business unit that the project is deemed necessary 
for its operations and meets its requirements.

                     BUSINESS SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $229,914,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     253,674,000
Committee recommendation................................     274,119,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Business Systems Modernization account provides 
resources for revamping business practices and acquiring new 
technology. The IRS has undertaken a multi-year, multi-billion 
dollar effort to migrate from its antiquated legacy system to 
bring the IRS tax administration system to a level of public 
and private sector best practices. The IRS is using a formal 
methodology to prioritize, approve, fund, and evaluate its 
portfolio of business systems modernization investments. This 
methodology is designed to enforce a documented, repeatable, 
and measurable process for managing investments throughout 
their life cycle. The process is reviewed by the Government 
Accountability Office on a regular basis as part of the 
submission requirements for expenditure plans to the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations. The expenditure plan 
approval process prior to the use of appropriated funds 
continues for fiscal year 2010.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $274,119,000 for Business Systems 
Modernization [BSM] for fiscal year 2010. This amount is 
$44,205,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and 
$20,445,000 above the budget request. The Committee continues 
to believe that BSM is the IRS's highest management and 
administrative priority. As one of the Federal Government's 
largest, most visible, and sensitive modernization efforts, 
managing the risks inherent in BSM will require vigilant 
management attention for several years. To the IRS's credit, 
the program has made steady progress over the past few years. 
The replacement of the aging, vintage 1969 individual master 
file with the new customer account data engine [CADE] will 
permit daily, rather than weekly, updating of individual tax 
accounts. With CADE as its centerpiece, systems modernization 
by the IRS promotes enhanced customer service, more expeditious 
refund processing, and better administration of the tax system.
    The Committee believes that the amount requested in the 
budget for the BSM account is inadequate. The Committee 
recommends an additional $20,445,000 to augment the IRS's 
continued investment in developing the CADE, the database that 
will ultimately be the central repository of tax account 
information for all individual taxpayers. The Committee notes 
that the IRS recently shifted its strategy for CADE, to focus 
on completion of the core taxpayer account database. This 
approach will allow the IRS to accelerate data conversion to 
the new database while also addressing security, financial 
material weaknesses, and long-term architectural planning 
concerns. It is expected that once completed, the core database 
will improve the overall functionality of existing 
modernization systems, as well as improve overall customer 
service to taxpayers.
    The Committee shares the concern of the IRS Oversight Board 
about the particularly acute needs of the CADE project, which 
go far beyond what was requested in fiscal year 2010 and will 
certainly grow in fiscal year 2011. The Committee believes it 
is essential to accelerate the pace of progress and allow the 
IRS to achieve key milestones in the immediate future fiscal 
years. The Committee strongly urges that future funding 
requests take into account the critical need to make progress 
on deployment of a daily Individual Master File capability and 
the CADE relational database.

               HEALTH INSURANCE TAX CREDIT ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................     $95,406,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      15,512,000
Committee recommendation................................      15,512,000

\1\Includes $80,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation provides operating funds to administer 
the advance payment feature of a refundable trade adjustment 
assistance health insurance tax credit program to assist 
dislocated workers with their health insurance premiums. The 
tax credit program was enacted by the Trade Act of 2002 (Public 
Law 107-210) and became effective in August 2003.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation provides $15,512,000 for the 
Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration in fiscal year 2010. 
This amount is $79,894,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted 
level and the same as the budget request. Under the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5), 
$80,000,000 was provided to HITCA to implement the health 
insurance tax credit under the TAA Health Coverage Improvement 
Act of 2009.

          ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

    The Committee has included six administrative provisions 
carried in prior appropriations acts as follows:
    Section 101 continues a provision allowing the IRS to 
transfer up to 5 percent of any appropriation made available to 
the Agency in fiscal year 2010 to any other IRS account, with 
the exception of the Enforcement account, which is limited to 3 
percent. The IRS is directed to follow the Committee's 
reprogramming procedures outlined earlier in this report.
    Section 102 continues a provision maintaining a training 
program in taxpayers' rights and cross-cultural relations.
    Section 103 continues a provision requiring the IRS to 
institute and enforce policies and procedures, which will 
safeguard the confidentiality of taxpayer information.
    Section 104 continues a provision directing that funds 
shall be available for improved facilities and increased 
staffing to support a 1-800 help line service for taxpayers.
    Section 105 continues, but modifies, a provision 
designating not less than $7,100,000,000 for enhanced tax 
enforcement to address the Federal tax gap and an additional 
$890,000,000 for the Internal Revenue Service for enhanced tax 
enforcement activities. This provision is consistent with 
section 401(c)(2)(B) of the concurrent resolution on the budget 
for fiscal year 2010 (S. Con. Res. 13; House Report 111-089).
    Section 106 continues a provision that prohibits the use of 
funds in this act to enter into, renew, extend, administer, 
implement, enforce, provide oversight of, or make any payment 
related to any qualified tax collection contract.

         Administrative Provisions--Department of the Treasury

    The Committee includes 11 administrative provisions carried 
over from prior appropriations acts. The administrative 
provisions are as follows:
    Section 107 authorizes certain basic services within the 
Treasury Department in fiscal year 2010, including purchase of 
uniforms; maintenance, repairs, and cleaning; purchase of 
insurance for official motor vehicles operated in foreign 
countries; and contracts with the Department of State for 
health and medical services to employees and their dependents 
serving in foreign countries.
    Section 108 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between 
Departmental Offices, Office of Inspector General, Financial 
Management Service, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and the Bureau of the 
Public Debt appropriations under certain circumstances.
    Section 109 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between 
the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Inspector General 
for Tax Administration under certain circumstances.
    Section 110 requires that the purchase of law enforcement 
vehicles be consistent with departmental vehicle management 
principles.
    Section 111 prohibits the Department of the Treasury and 
the Bureau of Engraving and Printing from redesigning the $1 
Federal Reserve Note.
    Section 112 authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to 
transfer funds from Salaries and Expenses, Financial Management 
Service, to the Debt Collection Fund as necessary to cover the 
costs of debt collection. Such amounts shall be reimbursed to 
the Salaries and Expenses account from debt collections 
received in the Debt Collection Fund.
    Section 113 extends for 1 year the authority to conduct a 
personnel management demonstration project.
    Section 114 requires prior approval for the construction 
and operation of a museum by the United States Mint.
    Section 115 prohibits the merger of the United States Mint 
and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing without prior approval 
of the committees of jurisdiction.
    Section 116 authorizes the Department's intelligence 
activities.
    Section 117 permits the Bureau of Engraving and printing to 
use $5,000 from the Industrial Revolving Fund for reception and 
representation expenses.

                                TITLE II

    EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE 
                               PRESIDENT

                     Compensation of the President

Appropriations, 2009....................................        $450,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................         450,000
Committee recommendation................................         450,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides for the compensation of the 
President, including an expense allowance as authorized by 3 
U.S.C. 102.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $450,000 for 
compensation of the President, including an expense allowance 
of $50,000. This is the same as the fiscal year 2009 enacted 
level and the same as the budget estimate. The expense account 
is for official use as authorized by title 3, United States 
Code and is not considered taxable to the President. The bill 
specifies that any unused amount shall revert to the Treasury 
consistent with 31 U.S.C. 1552.

                            The White House


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................     $53,899,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      59,319,000
Committee recommendation................................      59,319,000

\1\Amount does not include funding of the Office of Policy Development 
which was funded as a separate appropriation in fiscal year 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The ``Salaries and Expenses'' account of The White House 
(previously titled ``The White House Office'') provides staff 
assistance and administrative services for the direct support 
of the President. The office also serves as the President's 
representative before the media. In accordance with 3 U.S.C. 
105, the office also supports and assists the activities of the 
spouse of the President.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $59,319,000 
for The White House, Salaries and Expenses. The recommendation 
is $5,420,000 more than the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and 
is equal to the budget request.
    The budget requests that funding for the Office of Policy 
Development be included in funds appropriated under this 
heading. The Office of Policy Development supports the National 
Economic Council and the Domestic Policy Council in carrying 
out their responsibilities to advise and assist the President 
in the formulation, coordination, and implementation of 
economic and domestic policy. The Office of Policy Development 
also provides support for other domestic policy development and 
implementation activities as directed by the President. The 
Committee agrees with the proposed consolidation and includes 
funding for the Office of Policy Development within the amounts 
recommended under this heading.
    Of the total funding, the Committee recommends $1,400,000 
for the Office of National AIDS Policy. The Committee directs 
the administration to coordinate a Government-wide effort to 
develop and implement a domestic AIDS strategy, including the 
development of targets for improved prevention and treatment 
outcomes.
    The Committee expects officials employed in whole or in 
part by the Executive Office of the President, and designated 
by the President to coordinate policy agendas across executive 
departments and agencies, to keep Congress fully and currently 
informed of such activities.

                 Executive Residence at the White House


                           OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $13,363,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      13,838,000
Committee recommendation................................      13,838,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    These funds provide for the care, maintenance, repair, 
alteration, refurnishing, improvement, air-conditioning, 
heating, and lighting of the White House and the official and 
ceremonial functions of the President.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,838,000 
for the Executive Residence at the White House. The Committee 
recommendation is $475,000 more than the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level and is equal to the budget request. The 
accompanying bill also continues certain restrictions on 
reimbursable expenses for use of the Executive Residence.

                   White House Repair and Restoration

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $1,600,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       2,500,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,500,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account funds the repair, alteration, and improvement 
of the Executive Residence at the White House. A separate 
account was established in fiscal year 1996 to program and 
track expenditures for the capital improvement projects at the 
Executive Residence at the White House.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,500,000 for 
White House Repair and Restoration, equal to the budget request 
and $900,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level.

                      Council of Economic Advisers


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $4,118,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       4,200,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,200,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Council of Economic Advisers analyzes the national 
economy and its various segments, advises the President on 
economic developments, recommends policies for economic growth 
and stability, appraises economic programs and policies of the 
Federal Government, and assists in the preparation of the 
annual Economic Report of the President to Congress.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,200,000 for 
salaries and expenses of the Council of Economic Advisers. This 
amount is equal to the budget request and is $82,000 above the 
fiscal year 2009 enacted level.

                      Office of Policy Development


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $3,550,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    The budget requests that funding for the Office of Policy 
Development be included in funds appropriated for The White 
House, Salaries and Expenses. The Committee agrees with the 
proposed consolidation and recommends funding for the Office of 
Policy Development within funds recommended for The White 
House, Salaries and Expenses for fiscal year 2010.

                       National Security Council


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................  \1\$11,965,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      12,231,000
Committee recommendation................................      12,231,000

\1\Includes $2,936,000 provided in the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 
2009 (Public Law 111-32).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The National Security Council advises the President in 
integrating domestic, foreign, and military policies related to 
national security.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,231,000 
for the salaries and expenses of the National Security Council. 
This amount is equal to the budget request and $266,000 more 
than the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, which included amounts 
provided in the Supplemental Appropriations act, 2009 (Public 
Law 111-32).

                        Office of Administration


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $101,333,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     115,280,000
Committee recommendation................................     115,280,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Administration's mission is to provide high-
quality, cost-effective administrative services to the 
Executive Office of the President. These services, defined by 
Executive Order 12028 of 1977, include financial, personnel, 
library and records services, information management systems 
support, and general office services.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $115,280,000 
for the Office of Administration for fiscal year 2010, an 
increase of $13,947,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted 
level and equal to the budget request.
    The Committee has included space rental costs for the 
Office of Management and Budget [OMB] and the Office of 
National Drug Control Policy [ONDCP] in this account as the 
budget requests.
    The Committee's recommendation includes $16,768,000 to 
stabilize and modernize the information technology 
infrastructure within the Executive Office of the President. 
The Committee notes that the funding provided for this purpose 
for fiscal year 2010 is an increase of $4,863,000 over the 
fiscal year 2009 enacted funding. This increase supports a 
major initiative that will refresh the aging information 
technology infrastructure, strengthen disaster recovery 
capabilities, and expand the capabilities of the Executive 
Office of the President to electronically communicate with 
citizens and provide information to the public. The Committee 
supports the Office of Administration's plans to use funds 
first to stabilize and secure the existing infrastructure.
    The Committee directs the Office of Administration to place 
a top priority on the implementation of comprehensive policies 
and procedures for the preservation of all records, including 
electronic records such as e-mails, videos, and social 
networking communication, consistent with the requirements of 
the Presidential Records Act, the Federal Records Act, and 
other pertinent laws. The Office of Administration shall work 
closely with the National Archives and Records Administration 
[NARA] to ensure the full and complete maintenance and 
formatting of electronic records that will eventually be turned 
over to NARA. The Committee looks forward to receiving the 
previously requested report on this matter. The Committee 
expects the Office of Administration to keep the Committee 
fully apprised of funding needs related to record preservation.

                    Office of Management and Budget


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $87,972,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      92,687,000
Committee recommendation................................      92,687,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Management and Budget [OMB] assists the 
President in the discharge of his budgetary, management, and 
other executive responsibilities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $92,687,000 
for the Office of Management and Budget which is an increase of 
$4,715,000 above than the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and 
equal to the budget request.
    The Committee notes that additional funding over the budget 
request for fiscal year 2009 was provided to maintain and 
modernize the Federal Government's core budgeting system, which 
is nearly 20 years old. The Committee is disappointed that 
additional funds were not requested for fiscal year 2010 to 
modernize this system. The Committee reminds OMB that this 
system is used Government-wide by all Federal agencies in 
documenting and estimating budget activities, ensuring data 
integrity with other financial and accounting systems, and 
developing the President's budget proposals. A comprehensive 
modernization will improve the integrity of budgetary data, 
enhance the capabilities of budgetary staff, and provide a more 
dynamic decisionmaking tool for OMB and the President. The 
Committee urges OMB to focus efforts on planning and 
implementing a modernization of this system using funds 
provided for fiscal years 2009 and 2010.
    The Committee notes that section 723 of the bill provides 
the authority for each Executive department and agency to 
transfer funds to, or reimburse a dedicated budget account 
supporting, the activities of certain Government-wide councils. 
These councils include: the President's Management Council, for 
overall management improvement initiatives; the Chief Financial 
Officers Council, for financial management initiatives; the 
Chief Information Officers Council, for information technology 
initiatives; the Chief Human Capital Officers Council, for 
human capital initiatives; the Chief Acquisition Officers 
Council, for procurement initiatives; and the Performance 
Improvement Council, for performance improvement initiatives. 
The Committee notes that OMB approves such transfers and 
reimbursements and also directs the administration of these 
funds. The Committee directs OMB to include a budgetary 
justification for each council in the annual budget request for 
the Executive Office of the President beginning in fiscal year 
2011.

                 Office of National Drug Control Policy


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $27,200,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      27,575,000
Committee recommendation................................      28,575,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of National Drug Control Policy [ONDCP], 
established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, and 
reauthorized by Public Law 109-469, is charged with developing 
policies, objectives, and priorities for the National Drug 
Control Program. In addition, ONDCP administers the Counterdrug 
Technology Assessment Center, the High Intensity Drug 
Trafficking Areas program, the National Youth Anti-Drug Media 
Campaign, the Drug-Free Communities Program, and several other 
related initiatives.
    This account provides funding for personnel compensation, 
travel, and other basic operations of the Office, and for 
general policy research to support the formulation of the 
National Drug Control Strategy.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $28,575,000 
for ONDCP's salaries and expenses. This amount is $1,375,000 
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $1,000,000 above 
the budget request. The increased funding level is provided to 
allow ONDCP to reach an actual staffing level of 118 full-time 
equivalents.
    The Committee has been very concerned in recent years with 
the organizational structure of ONDCP and with staffing 
decisions made by the leadership of this office in the previous 
administration. Staffing levels have declined from fiscal year 
2000 to fiscal year 2008 by approximately 14 percent. The 
Committee has noted a lack of racial and ethnic diversity as 
well as a relatively low percentage of female representation as 
a percentage of the total workforce. Finally, the Committee has 
previously expressed displeasure with the role that political 
appointees have played in managing ONDCP.
    The Committee remains highly concerned that despite 
repeated Committee directives and prohibitions in recent years, 
ONDCP has failed to reverse a decision to reorganize 3 of its 
12 components, as described in a December 1, 2006 letter to the 
Committee. Among other things, this reorganization realigned or 
reassigned staff from the Office of Planning and Budget, 
renamed that office the Office of Performance and Budget, and 
established a new Performance Branch. The Committee is dismayed 
at the lack of progress on this issue and directs that the new 
leadership reinstate the organizational structure in place 
prior to the reorganization announced in the letter. ONDCP is 
directed to provide written notice of actions taken to 
implement this directive not later than 45 days after 
enactment.
    As a result of these concerns, in the fiscal year 2008 
Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public Law 110-161), Congress 
directed the National Academy of Public Administration [NAPA] 
to conduct an independent study and analysis of ONDCP's 
organization and management. After conducting a comprehensive 
assessment of ONDCP's management, structure, and human capital, 
NAPA issued its report in November 2008 and included five 
recommendations. Among other things, the report recommended 
that ONDCP streamline its organizational structure, rebalance 
its workforce, and implement effective human capital practices.
    The Committee agrees that ONDCP's implementation of each of 
the five recommendations will help ONDCP increase 
organizational and mission effectiveness. ONDCP should keep the 
Committee apprised as it implements the recommendations and 
action items contained in the NAPA report.

                COUNTERDRUG TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT CENTER

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $3,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center [CTAC] was 
established by the Counter-Narcotics Technology Act of 1990 
(Public Law 101-510) and reauthorized in 1998 (Public Law 105-
277) to serve as the central counterdrug technology research 
and development organization for the United States Government.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000 for 
the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center. This amount is 
$2,000,000 below the fiscal year enacted level, and the same as 
the budget request. The Committee is hopeful that new 
leadership will reinvigorate the CTAC program, allowing this 
once valuable program to again flourish.

                  Funds Appropriated to the President


                     FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS

                 HIGH INTENSITY DRUG TRAFFICKING AREAS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $234,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     220,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     234,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas [HIDTA] program 
was established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 
100-690) and the Office of National Drug Control Policy's 
reauthorization (Public Law 109-469) to provide assistance to 
Federal, State, and local law enforcement entities operating in 
those areas most adversely affected by drug trafficking.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $234,000,000 
for the HIDTA program, the same as the fiscal year 2009 level 
and $14,000,000 above the budget request. With the increased 
funding, the Committee expects ONDCP to provide a program 
adjustment for HIDTAs that qualify under performance 
measurement criteria taking into account local conditions and 
resources. In allocating funding provided above the level of 
the budget request, priority should be given to ensuring that 
HIDTAs receive adequate funding before allocating such funding 
to discretionary programs. The Committee directs that funding 
shall be provided for the existing HIDTAs at no less than the 
fiscal year 2009 level or $3,000,000, whichever is greater.
    The Committee continues to be concerned about the 
widespread use of methamphetamine. Hawaii has one of the 
highest rates in the Nation for methamphetamine abuse, per 
capita. In addition, Hawaii has experienced an increase in 
crystal methamphetamine availability, while the Nation as a 
whole has generally experienced a downward trend. Hawaii 
received its HIDTA designation in 1999, yet its allocation of 
funding is among the lowest in the Nation. Given the need to 
effectively address this growing problem, the Committee 
strongly recommends that ONDCP consider an increase in the 
allocation to the Hawaii HIDTA. ONDCP is directed to consult 
with the HIDTAs in advance of deciding programmatic spending 
allocations for discretionary (supplemental) funding.
    The Committee recommendation specifies that up to 
$2,700,000 may be used for auditing services and associated 
activities, and up to $500,000 shall be used to ensure the 
continued operation and maintenance of the Performance 
Management System.
    The Committee directs that the HIDTA funds be transferred 
to the appropriate drug control agencies expeditiously and 
includes provisions in the bill to help prevent delay.
    The Committee recognizes the National HIDTA Assistance 
Center for providing programmatic support to the HIDTA program 
to include training, financial management/audit review, and 
other essential services.
    The Committee retains a provision allowing unexpended funds 
obligated prior to 2 years ago for programs addressing the 
treatment or prevention of drug use to be used for other 
approved HIDTA activities.
    The HIDTA funds should not be used to supplant existing 
support for ongoing Federal, State, or local drug control 
operations normally funded out of the operating budgets of each 
agency. ONDCP is directed to withhold all HIDTA funds from a 
State until such time as a State or locality has met its 
financial obligation.

                  OTHER FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $174,700,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     174,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     174,750,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-690), and 
the Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act 
(Public Law 109-469) established this account to be 
administered by the Director of the Office of National Drug 
Control Policy. The funds appropriated to the program support 
high-priority drug control programs and may be transferred to 
drug control agencies.
    This account includes the following programs: National 
Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign, Drug-Free Communities Support 
Program, National Drug Court Institute, U.S. Anti-Doping 
Agency, World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA] membership dues, 
National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws, and Performance 
Measures Development.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $174,750,000 
for Other Federal Drug Control Programs, which is $50,000 above 
the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $750,000 above the 
budget request. Within this amount, the Committee provides the 
following funding levels:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign................     $70,000,000
Drug-Free Communities Support Program..................      90,750,000
    National Community Anti-Drug Coalition training....      (2,000,000)
National Drug Court Institute..........................       1,000,000
U.S. Anti-Doping Agency................................       9,600,000
World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA]........................       1,900,000
National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws............       1,250,000
Performance Measures Development.......................         250,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign.--The Committee has 
recommended consistent monetary support for the National Youth 
Anti-Drug Media Campaign since it was initially funded by 
Congress in fiscal year 1998. The Committee is concerned that 
methamphetamine use is having a disproportional impact on our 
rural communities, rendering the addiction an epidemic in the 
lives of so many Americans from the Nation's farmlands, 
reservations, and small towns. Most of these communities, 
because they are located outside of urban areas, lack the 
comprehensive support services needed to effectively address 
the addiction and its devastating grip on so many families. The 
Committee provides $70,000,000 for the Media Campaign, of which 
at least $8,000,000 shall be for methamphetamine prevention 
ads. The Committee directs that no more than 10 percent of the 
funding provided for the Media Campaign be used for 
administrative costs. ONDCP is encouraged to work with State 
and local governments to increase visibility of the Media 
Campaign. In order to combat methamphetamine abuse within 
scarce resources, the Committee encourages ONDCP to focus 
methamphetamine prevention advertising on geographic areas with 
the highest level of drug problem within a State. ONDCP is 
encouraged to use research-based advertising campaigns and to 
collaborate with statewide or regional methamphetamine 
prevention programs when possible.
    Drug-Free Communities Support Program.--ONDCP directs the 
Drug-Free Communities Support Program [DFCSP] in partnership 
with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 
Administration. DFCSP provides dollar for dollar matching 
grants of up to $125,000 to local coalitions that mobilize 
their communities to prevent youth alcohol, tobacco, illicit 
drug, and inhalant abuse. Such grants support coalitions of 
youth; parents; media; law enforcement; school officials; 
faith-based organizations; fraternal organizations; State, 
local, and tribal government agencies; healthcare 
professionals; and other community representatives. The DFCSP 
enables these coalitions to strengthen their coordination and 
prevention efforts, encourage citizen participation in 
substance abuse reduction efforts, and disseminate information 
about effective programs. The Committee provides $90,750,000 
for the continuation of the DFCSP.
    The Committee includes a provision in the bill directing 
ONDCP to provide $2,000,000 of DFCSP funds for training and 
related purposes as authorized by section 4 of Public Law 107-
82, as amended by Public Law 109-469.
    National Drug Court Institute.--The National Drug Court 
Institute facilitates the growth of the drug court movement by 
promoting and disseminating education, research, and 
scholarship concerning drug court programs and providing a 
comprehensive drug court training series for practitioners. 
Drug courts provide an effective means to fight drug-related 
crime through the cooperative efforts of State and local law 
enforcement, the judicial system, and the public health 
treatment network. The Committee provides $1,000,000 for the 
National Drug Court Institute.
    United States Anti-Doping Agency.--The United States Anti-
Doping Agency [USADA] is the independent anti-doping agency for 
Olympic sports in the United States, and is responsible for 
managing the testing and adjudication process for U.S. Olympic, 
Pan Am and Paralympic athletes. As a nonprofit corporation 
under the leadership of an independent Board of Directors, 
USADA has the authority to set forth guiding principles in 
anti-doping policy and to enforce any doping violations. In 
addition to managing collection and testing procedures, USADA 
is also responsible for enhancing research efforts and 
promoting educational programs to inform athletes of the rules 
governing the use of performance enhancing substances, as well 
as the ethics of doping and its harmful health effects.
    The Committee provides $9,600,000 for USADA, which is 
$200,000 less than the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the 
same as the budget request.
    World Anti-Doping Agency.--ONDCP represents the United 
States in the World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA], which promotes 
and coordinates international activities against doping in all 
forms of sports. The Committee provides $1,900,000 for 
membership dues to the WADA.
    National Alliance For Model State Drug Laws.--The National 
Alliance for Model State Drug Laws [NAMSDL] is a national 
organization that drafts, researches, and analyzes model drug 
and alcohol laws and related State statutes, provides access to 
a national network of drug and alcohol experts, and facilitates 
working relationships among State and community leaders and 
drug and alcohol professionals. In doing so, NAMSDL encourages 
States to adopt and implement laws, policies, and regulations 
to reduce drug trafficking, drug use, and their related 
consequences. The Committee provides $1,250,000 to NAMSDL and 
directs ONDCP to provide the entire amount directly to NAMSDL 
within 30 days after enactment of this act.
    National Drug Control Performance Measures Development.--
Performance Measures funding is used to conduct evaluation 
research for assessing the effectiveness of the National Drug 
Control Strategy. The Committee provides $250,000 for this 
program and directs ONDCP to outline and submit to the 
Committee a detailed plan for projects that assess the 
effectiveness of the strategy in achieving its goals and 
objectives, and develop and improve needed data sources, 
including specific funding levels, no later than 120 days after 
enactment of this act.

                          Unanticipated Needs

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    These funds enable the President to meet unanticipated 
exigencies in support of the national interest, security, or 
defense.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,000,000, which is equal to the 
amount appropriated in fiscal year 2009 and the same as the 
budget request.

           Partnership Fund for Program Integrity Innovation


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010...................................    $175,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      40,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Partnership Fund for Program Integrity Innovation 
(Partnership Fund) is a new program recommended by the 
President for fiscal year 2010. The Committee understands that 
the Partnership Fund will support pilot programs designed to 
reduce errors and improve efficiency and service of Federal 
programs administered by States. The Partnership Fund pilot 
programs will focus on coordinating State-administered Federal 
programs both within States and between State and Federal 
officials and on technology solutions that may serve as best 
practices in the future. The Director of the Office of 
Management and Budget [OMB] will chair an interagency council 
consisting of representatives of appropriate Federal agencies, 
States, and other stakeholders. The council will analyze and 
select pilot programs for funding, develop strategies and goals 
for the overall program as well as for each pilot program, and 
develop methodologies for assessing the performance of the 
overall program and the pilot programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $40,000,000 for the Partnership 
Fund. The Partnership Fund is a new program and was not funded 
in fiscal year 2009.
    Although the recommended funding is $135,000,000 below the 
budget request, the Committee believes that the recommended 
amount represents sufficient resources to initiate the 
Partnership Fund in fiscal year 2010. The Committee expects to 
make future funding recommendations based on the progress and 
performance of the Partnership Fund in fiscal year 2010 and 
beyond.
    The Committee is pleased with the proposed initiative to 
improve the operations of State-administered Federal programs. 
Efficiencies can be gained by better coordinating Federal 
programs, and technology may play a significant role in such 
improvements.
    The Committee notes that OMB does not administer or execute 
Federal programs. While the Committee expects OMB to play a 
coordinating role in designing pilot programs, developing 
performance measures, and allocating funds, the Committee 
expects that the interagency council will be the exclusive 
decisionmaking body for such activities. As Chair of the 
Interagency Council, the Committee directs the Director of OMB 
to seek consensus and input to the maximum extent possible from 
council members and participating Federal and State agencies.
    The Committee directs the interagency council, in 
consultation with OMB, to submit a progress report to the 
Committee on Appropriations, not later than March 30, 2010 and 
semiannually until the program is concluded, including detailed 
information on the goals and objectives of the Partnership Fund 
and of each pilot project; performance measures for the 
Partnership Fund and each pilot project; and an evaluation of 
the performance of the overall Partnership Fund and each pilot 
project to date. The report shall also include an operating 
plan detailing funding allocations for each pilot project and 
planned future funding allocations.

             Presidential Transition Administrative Support

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $8,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    This account supports the Office of Administration for 
expenses associated with the transition to the next 
Presidential administration. The Committee does not provide 
funding for this account for fiscal year 2010 because there 
will not be a Presidential transition in that year.

                  Special Assistance to the President


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $4,496,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       4,604,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,604,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation provides for staff and expenses to 
enable the Vice President to provide assistance to the 
President in connection with the performance of executive 
duties and responsibilities. The Vice President also has a 
staff funded by the Senate to assist him in the performance of 
his legislative duties. These funds also support the official 
activities of the spouse of the Vice President.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,604,000 for 
special assistance to the President. This amount is the same as 
the budget request and $108,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level.

                Official Residence of the Vice President


                           OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................        $323,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................         330,000
Committee recommendation................................         330,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account supports the care and operation of the Vice 
President's residence on the grounds of the Naval Observatory. 
These funds specifically support equipment, furnishings, dining 
facilities, and services required to perform and discharge the 
Vice President's official duties, functions, and obligations.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $330,000 for 
the official residence of the Vice President. This amount is 
the same as the budget request and $7,000 above the fiscal year 
2009 enacted level.

Administrative Provisions--Executive Office of the President and Funds 
                     Appropriated to the President

    Section 201 continues a provision that provides flexibility 
in the use of funds in accounts under the Executive Office of 
the President.
    Section 202 requires a detailed financial plan by the 
Director of the ONDCP prior to the obligation of funds in 
fiscal year 2010.
    Section 203 allows for the transfer of up to 2 percent 
among programs within ONDCP.
    Section 204 establishes reprogramming requirements for 
ONDCP.

                               TITLE III

                             THE JUDICIARY

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Established under Article III of the Constitution, the 
judicial branch of Government is a separate but equal branch. 
The Federal judiciary consists of the Supreme Court, United 
States Courts of Appeals, District Courts, Bankruptcy Courts, 
Court of International Trade, Court of Federal Claims, and 
several other entities and programs. The organization of the 
judiciary, the district and circuit boundaries, the places of 
holding court, and the number of Federal judges are legislated 
by the Congress and signed into law by the President.
    The Committee's recommended funding levels support the 
Federal judiciary's role of providing equal justice under the 
law and include sufficient funds to support this critical 
mission. The recommended funding level includes the salaries of 
judges and support staff and the operation and security of our 
Nation's courts.
    The judicial branch is reminded that it, too, is subject to 
the same funding constraints facing the executive and 
legislative branches and continues to urge the Federal 
judiciary to devote its resources primarily to the retention of 
staff. Further, the judiciary is encouraged to contain 
controllable costs such as travel, construction, and other 
expenses.

                   Supreme Court of the United States

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $69,777,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      74,740,000
Committee recommendation................................      74,081,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The United States Supreme Court consists of nine justices 
appointed under Article III of the Constitution of the United 
States, one of whom is appointed as Chief Justice of the United 
States. The Supreme Court acts as the final arbiter in the 
Federal court system.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $74,081,000 
for the Justices, their supporting personnel, and the costs of 
operating the Supreme Court, excluding the care of the building 
and grounds. The recommendation is $4,304,000 above the fiscal 
year 2009 funding level and slightly below the request.

                    CARE OF THE BUILDING AND GROUNDS

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $18,447,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      14,568,000
Committee recommendation................................      14,525,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Care of the Building and Grounds, for expenditure by the 
Architect of the Capitol, provides for the structural and 
mechanical care of the United States Supreme Court Building and 
Grounds, including maintenance and operation of mechanical, 
electrical, and electronic equipment.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $14,525,000 
for personnel and other services related to the Supreme Court 
building and grounds, which is supervised by the Architect of 
the Capitol. The recommendation is $3,922,000 below the fiscal 
year 2009 funding level and approximately the same as the 
budget request. The Committee directs the Court to report to 
the Committee no later than 90 days after enactment of this act 
on its construction and modernization plans and to update the 
Committee as the Court becomes aware of any changes in schedule 
or budgetary needs.

         United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $30,384,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      36,981,000
Committee recommendation................................      32,300,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 
was established on October 1, 1982 under Article III of the 
Constitution. The court was formed by the merger of the United 
States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals and the appellate 
division of the United States Court of Claims. The court 
consists of 12 judges who are appointed by the President, with 
the advice and consent of the Senate. Judges are appointed to 
the court under Article III of the Constitution of the United 
States.
    The Federal Circuit has nationwide jurisdiction in a 
variety of subject matter, including international trade, 
Government contracts, patents, certain claims for money from 
the United States Government, Federal personnel, and veterans' 
benefits. Appeals to the court come from all Federal district 
courts, the United States Court of Federal Claims, the United 
States Court of International Trade, and the United States 
Court of Veterans Appeals. The court also takes appeals of 
certain administrative agencies' decisions, including the Merit 
Systems Protection Board, the Board of Contract Appeals, the 
Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, and the Trademark 
Trial and Appeals Board. Decisions of the United States 
International Trade Commission, the Office of Compliance of the 
United States Congress, and the Government Accountability 
Office Personnel Appeals Board are also reviewable by the 
court.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $32,300,000. 
The recommendation is $1,916,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
funding level, and $4,681,000 below the budget request but 
consistent with the judiciary's re-estimate of fiscal year 2010 
requirements.

               United States Court of International Trade


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $19,605,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      21,517,000
Committee recommendation................................      21,374,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The United States Court of International Trade, located in 
New York City, consists of nine Article III judges. The court 
has exclusive nationwide jurisdiction over civil actions 
brought against the United States, its agencies and officers, 
and certain civil actions brought by the United States, arising 
out of import transactions and the administration and 
enforcement of the Federal customs and international trade 
laws.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $21,374,000. 
The recommendation is $1,769,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
funding level and consistent with the judiciary's re-estimate 
of fiscal year 2010 requirements.

    Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................  $4,811,369,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   5,162,252,000
Committee recommendation................................   5,076,845,000

\1\Includes $10,000,000 provided in the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 
2009 (Public Law 111-32).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Salaries and Expenses is one of four accounts that provide 
total funding for the Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and 
Other Judicial Services. In addition to funding the salaries of 
judges and support staff, this account also funds the operating 
costs of appellate, district, and bankruptcy courts, the Court 
of Federal Claims, and probation and pretrial services offices.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$5,076,845,000. The recommendation is $265,476,000 above the 
fiscal year 2009 funding level and $85,407,000 below the budget 
request.
    Use of Lease-Construction Projects.--Historically, the 
judiciary, in conjunction with the General Services 
Administration, has utilized two execution strategies for 
meeting its courthouse space needs--Federal construction and 
lease-construction. The Committee does not believe that every 
need for judicial space must be met through additional Federal 
construction and that lease-construction can be an appropriate 
alternative under certain circumstances. The Committee directs 
the General Services Administration and the judiciary to 
develop and submit a joint report on this issue to the 
Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives no later than 120 days after enactment of this 
act. The report should identify the circumstances under which 
it would be appropriate to acquire court facilities using a 
lease-construction strategy.
    Yuma, Arizona Courthouse.--In the case of the proposed 
lease-construction project for courthouse space in Yuma, 
Arizona, the Committee supports the lease-construction 
strategy.

                 VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION TRUST FUND

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $4,253,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       5,428,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,428,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Enacted by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 
1986 (Public Law 99-660), the Vaccine Injury Compensation 
Program is a Federal no-fault program designed to resolve a 
perceived crisis in vaccine tort liability claims that 
threatened the continued availability of childhood vaccines 
nationwide. The statute's primary intention is the creation of 
a more efficient adjudicatory mechanism that ensures a no-fault 
compensation result for those allegedly injured or killed by 
certain covered vaccines. This program protects the 
availability of vaccines in the United States by diverting a 
substantial number of claims from the tort arena.
    Not only did this act create a special fund to pay 
judgments awarded under the act, but it also created the Office 
of Special Masters within the United States Court of Federal 
Claims to hear vaccine injury cases. The act stipulates that up 
to eight special masters may be appointed for this purpose. The 
special masters expenditures are reimbursed to the judiciary 
for vaccine injury cases from a special fund set up under the 
Vaccine Act.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,428,000. 
The recommendation is $1,175,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
funding level and consistent with the budget request.

                           DEFENDER SERVICES

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................    $849,400,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     982,646,000
Committee recommendation................................     975,504,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Defender Services program ensures the right to counsel 
guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, the Criminal Justice Act (18 
U.S.C. 3006A(e)) and other congressional mandates for those who 
cannot afford to retain counsel and other necessary defense 
services. The Criminal Justice Act provides that courts appoint 
counsel from Federal public and community defender 
organizations or from a panel of private attorneys established 
by the court. The Defender Services program helps to maintain 
public confidence in the Nation's commitment to equal justice 
under the law and ensures the successful operation of the 
constitutionally based adversary system of justice by which 
Federal criminal laws and federally guaranteed rights are 
enforced.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $975,504,000. 
The recommendation is $126,104,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
funding level and $7,142,000 below the budget request.
    Panel Attorney Pay Rates.--The Committee's recommended 
funding level supports an increase in the non-capital panel 
attorney rate per hour from $110 to $115 in fiscal year 2010.

                    FEES OF JURORS AND COMMISSIONERS

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $62,206,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      63,401,000
Committee recommendation................................      62,275,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides for the statutory fees and allowances 
of grand and petit jurors and for the compensation of jury and 
land commissioners. Budgetary requirements depend primarily 
upon the volume and the length of jury trials demanded by 
parties to both civil and criminal actions and the number of 
grand juries being convened by the courts at the request of the 
United States Attorneys.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $62,275,000. 
The recommendation is $69,000 more than the fiscal year 2009 
funding level and $1,126,000 less than the budget request.

                             COURT SECURITY

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $428,858,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     463,642,000
Committee recommendation................................     457,353,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Court Security appropriation was established in 1983 
and funds the necessary expenses incident to the provision of 
protective guard services, and the procurement, installation, 
and maintenance of security systems and equipment for United 
States courthouses and other facilities housing Federal court 
operations, including building access control, inspection of 
mail and packages, directed security patrols, perimeter 
security provided by the Federal Protective Service, and other 
similar activities as authorized by section 1010 of the 
Judicial Improvement and Access to Justice Act (Public Law 100-
702).

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $457,353,000. 
The recommendation is $28,495,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
funding level and $6,289,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee recommends funding for new U.S. Marshals 
Service positions as well as requested reimbursements to the 
Marshals Service.

           Administrative Office of the United States Courts


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $79,049,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      83,963,000
Committee recommendation................................      83,075,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Administrative Office [AO] of the United States Courts 
was created in 1939 by an act of Congress. It serves the 
Federal judiciary in carrying out its constitutional mission to 
provide equal justice under the law. Beyond providing numerous 
services to the Federal courts, the AO provides support and 
staff counsel to the Judicial Conference of the United States 
and its committees, and implements Judicial Conference policies 
as well as applicable Federal statutes and regulations. The AO 
is the focal point for communication and coordination within 
the Federal judiciary and with Congress, the executive branch, 
and the public on behalf of the judiciary.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $83,075,000. 
This recommendation is $4,026,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
funding level and $888,000 below the budget request.

                        Federal Judicial Center


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $25,725,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      27,486,000
Committee recommendation................................      27,328,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Federal Judicial Center, located in Washington, DC, 
improves the management of Federal judicial dockets and court 
administration through education for judges and staff, and 
research, evaluation, and planning assistance for the courts 
and the Judicial Conference. The Center's responsibilities 
include educating judges and other judicial branch personnel 
about legal developments and efficient litigation management 
and court administration. Additionally, the Center also 
analyzes the efficacy of case and court management procedures 
and ensures the Federal judiciary is aware of the methods of 
best practice.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $27,328,000. 
The recommendation is $1,603,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
funding level and $158,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee has included funding requested for both 
education, research, and technology, as well as education and 
training enhancements. The Committee directs the Federal 
Judicial Center to keep the Committee apprised of staff brought 
on board throughout fiscal years 2009 and 2010.

                       Judicial Retirement Funds


                    PAYMENT TO JUDICIARY TRUST FUNDS

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $76,140,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      82,374,000
Committee recommendation................................      82,374,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The funds in this account cover the estimated future 
benefit payments to be made to retired bankruptcy judges and 
magistrate judges, claims court judges, and spouses and 
dependent children of deceased judicial officers.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $82,374,000 
for payments to the Judicial Officers' Retirement Fund and the 
Claims Court Judges Retirement Fund. The recommendation is 
$6,234,000 above the fiscal year 2009 funding level and 
consistent with the budget request.

                  United States Sentencing Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $16,225,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      17,056,000
Committee recommendation................................      16,837,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The United States Sentencing Commission establishes, 
reviews, and revises sentencing guidelines, policies, and 
practices for the Federal criminal justice system. The 
Commission is also required to monitor the operation of the 
guidelines and to identify and report necessary changes to the 
Congress.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,837,000. 
The recommendation is $612,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
funding level and consistent with the judiciary's re-estimate 
of fiscal year 2010 requirements.

                Administrative Provisions--The Judiciary

    The Committee recommends the following administrative 
provisions for the judiciary.
    Section 301 allows the judiciary to expend funds for the 
employment of experts and consultative services.
    Section 302 allows the judiciary, subject to the 
Committee's reprogramming procedures, to transfer up to 5 
percent between appropriations, but limits to 10 percent the 
amount that may be transferred into any one appropriation.
    Section 303 limits official reception and representation 
expenses incurred by the Judicial Conference of the United 
States to no more than $11,000.
    Section 304 requires the Administrative Office to submit an 
annual financial plan for the judiciary within 90 days of 
enactment of this act.
    Section 305 grants the judicial branch the same tenant 
alteration authorities as the executive branch.
    Section 306 provides continued authority for a court 
security pilot program.
    Section 307 allows for a salary adjustment for Justices and 
judges.

                                TITLE IV

                          DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

                            Federal Payments

                             FEDERAL FUNDS

    A total of $727,365,000 in Federal funds are estimated to 
be available to the District of Columbia government, the 
District of Columbia Courts, the District of Columbia Court 
Services and Offender Supervision Agency, and other D.C. 
entities. This is $14,995,000 below the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level and $11,760,000 below the budget request. A total 
of $2,575,447,000 in Federal funds will be received by the 
District government from the various Federal grant programs, 
including Federal reimbursements from such programs as Medicaid 
and Medicare.

              FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR RESIDENT TUITION SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $35,100,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      35,100,000
Committee recommendation................................      35,100,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Resident Tuition Support program was created by the 
District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 (Public Law 
106-98), expanded through the District of Columbia College 
Access Improvement Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-157), and 
amended and reauthorized through Public Law 110-97. This 
program provides eligible college-bound District residents the 
opportunity to expand their higher education choices.
    Under the program, financial assistance is available to 
qualified District residents who attend public colleges outside 
of the District of Columbia, private postsecondary institutions 
in the District of Columbia, Maryland, or Virginia, or any 
historically black college or university. The private-school 
tuition grants are restricted to nonprofit institutions. 
Students who attend public schools receive assistance equal to 
the difference between the tuition paid by residents of the 
State in which the institution is located and the tuition 
charged to nonresident students, with an annual limit of 
$10,000 and a lifetime limit of $50,000. Private-school 
students receive a $2,500 maximum annual grant, with a lifetime 
limit of $12,500.
    Since its inception, the program has disbursed over 
$218,975,600 for the benefit of over 14,125 District of 
Columbia residents. Thirty-eight percent of the grantees are 
the first members of their families to attend college.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $35,100,000 
for the resident tuition support (DC TAG) program, the same as 
the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget 
request. The Committee understands that the program will have 
$192,774 in carryover funds available in fiscal year 2010. The 
Committee urges the Office of the State Superintendent of 
Education to continue its efforts to improve the student 
retention and college graduation rate of program participants. 
Because program costs have the potential of growing beyond a 
level for which increased Federal funding may be available and 
sustainable, the Committee directs the Mayor and the Office of 
the State Superintendent of Education to continue the use of 
effective cost containment measures and regularly report to 
Congress on the effects of these efforts. The Committee further 
directs the District to fully explore non-Federal sources of 
additional funds to augment the Federal investment to meet 
program needs. As specified in Public Law 106-98 which 
established the program, the Committee directs the Mayor to 
address any insufficiency in funding through ratable reductions 
and other adjustments or prioritization considerations based on 
the income and need of eligible students.
    According to data collected by the National Student 
Clearinghouse [NCS], more than 3,600 students participating in 
the DC TAG program have earned 2- or 4-year college degrees. 
The Committee understands that the Office of the State 
Superintendent of Education is currently conducting a 
comprehensive review of graduation rates for students enrolled 
in the DC TAG program. The Committee directs the District of 
Columbia to promptly provide the results of the completed 
review to the Committees on Appropriations, the Senate 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and 
the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

   FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR EMERGENCY PLANNING AND SECURITY COSTS IN THE 
                          DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $39,177,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      15,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      15,350,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Due to the fact that the District of Columbia is the seat 
of the Federal Government and headquarters of many 
international organizations, District police, fire, and 
emergency personnel have had to provide security for a number 
of events. As the need for the District of Columbia to provide 
security increases, overtime costs for personnel escalate and 
divert local police from neighborhood patrols. The President 
has supported reimbursing the District for these costs.
    In addition, the District of Columbia National Guard, under 
the exclusive jurisdiction of the President of the United 
States, is specifically trained to support law enforcement 
during critical missions, such as demonstrations, Presidential 
inaugurations and funerals, and emergency services for weather-
related contingencies. The D.C. Air Guard patrols the skies 
over the District on round-the-clock alert. However, residency 
restrictions preclude a significant number of Guard members 
from eligibility for tuition assistance programs, which has 
severely hampered recruitment and retention efforts.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total payment of $15,350,000, of 
which $15,000,000 is for the District of Columbia for the costs 
of providing public safety at events related to the presence of 
the national capital in the District of Columbia, for the costs 
of providing support requested by the United States Secret 
Service Division in carrying out their protective duties under 
the direction of the Secretary of Homeland Security, and for 
the costs of providing support to respond to immediate and 
specific terrorist threats or attacks in the District of 
Columbia or surrounding jurisdictions.
    In addition, the District may use any funds remaining from 
prior year appropriations under this heading. The District may 
use the payment to cover the costs of Executive transportation 
support including motorcades and helicopter landings. The 
Committee directs the District of Columbia to submit a detailed 
budget justification with its funding request for fiscal year 
2011. The Committee further directs the District of Columbia to 
submit, within 60 days of the end of fiscal year 2010, a report 
to the House and the Senate Committees on Appropriations 
detailing the purposes and amounts expended using the funds, 
particularly noting any deviation from the original proposed 
spending.
    In addition, the Committee recommends $350,000 for a 
tuition assistance program for nonresident District of Columbia 
National Guard members.
    The total funding is $23,827,000 below the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level and $350,000 above the budget request. The 
Committee notes that in the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 
(Public Law 111-8), an enhanced Federal payment of $38,825,000 
was provided to support the unprecedented security and planning 
costs incurred by the District of Columbia for the January 2009 
Presidential Inauguration.

           FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $248,409,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     248,592,000
Committee recommendation................................     258,517,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Under the National Capital Revitalization and Self-
Government Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-33, title 
XI), the Federal Government is required to finance the District 
of Columbia Courts. This Federal payment to the District of 
Columbia Courts funds the operations of the District of 
Columbia Court of Appeals, Superior Court, the Court System, 
and the Capital Improvement Program. Capital improvements 
include a complete restoration of the historic Old Courthouse, 
as well as design and renovation work on the H. Carl Moultrie I 
Courthouse and several other buildings as part of a master plan 
for Judiciary Square. By law, the annual budget includes 
estimates of the expenditures for the operations of the Courts 
prepared by the Joint Committee on Judicial Administration as 
well as the President's recommendation for funding the Courts' 
operations.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a Federal payment to the District 
of Columbia Courts of $258,517,000, which is $10,108,000 above 
the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $9,565,000 above the 
President's budget request. This amount includes $12,014,000 
for the Court of Appeals, $110,836,000 for the Superior Court, 
$60,147,000 for the Court System, and $75,520,000 for capital 
improvements to courthouse facilities.
    The Committee recommendation for the Superior Court of the 
District of Columbia is $2,345,000 above the President's 
recommended funding of $108,491,000, and will permit the Court 
to enhance juvenile probation services through a community-
based drop-in center to supervise youth and establish a mental 
health court coordinator to strengthen services for defendants 
with mental illness.
    The Committee recommendation for the District of Columbia 
Court System is $1,700,000 above the President's recommended 
funding of $58,447,000, and will permit the Court System to 
enhance performance reporting and strategic management to 
increase the Courts' accountability to the public and support 
an IT infrastructure program manager to ensure that physical 
relocation of the information technology offices within the 
court complex is not disruptive to court operations.
    The Committee recommendation for capital improvements 
provides $5,520,000 above the President's recommendation of 
$70,000,000 to support maintenance of infrastructure, including 
HVAC, electrical, and plumbing upgrades, and other repair 
projects to address health and safety risks, improve signage, 
enhance ADA access, and update technology. The Committee 
supports the $15,000,000 included in the President's 
recommendation to complete the modernization of the adult 
cellblock and United States Marshals Service administrative 
space to address health, safety, and security concerns.
    The Committee commends the courts on the steps taken to 
address concerns about the substandard working conditions of 
the United States Marshals Service at the Moultrie Courthouse. 
The Committee encourages the District of Columbia Courts to 
continue progress on the plan to upgrade the conditions to an 
acceptable level. The Committee directs the District of 
Columbia Courts to keep the Committee regularly informed on the 
status of the renovations, including prompt notification of any 
significant cost increases or schedule delays.

            DEFENDER SERVICES IN DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $52,475,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      52,475,000
Committee recommendation................................      55,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The District of Columbia Courts appoint and compensate 
attorneys to represent persons who are financially unable to 
obtain such representation. The Defender Services programs 
provide counsel for indigent persons who are charged with 
criminal offenses, for family proceedings involving child 
abuse, neglect, and termination of parental rights, and for 
guardianship proceedings for protection of mentally 
incapacitated individuals and minors whose parents are 
deceased.
    In addition to legal representation, these programs provide 
indigent persons with services such as transcripts of court 
proceedings, expert witness testimony, foreign and sign 
language interpretation, and investigations and genetic 
testing.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $55,000,000 
for Defender Services in the District of Columbia Courts. This 
is $2,525,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and 
$2,525,000 above the budget request.
    To promote access to justice and ensure that high-quality 
legal representation remains available to the indigent in the 
District of Columbia Courts, the Committee recommends an 
increase to support a continued phase-in of the compensation 
adjustment from $80 to $90 per hour for attorneys appointed to 
represent persons under the Criminal Justice Act, the Counsel 
for Child Abuse and Neglect program, and the Guardianship 
program.

 FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER SUPERVISION AGENCY 
                      FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $203,490,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     212,408,000
Committee recommendation................................     212,408,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency [CSOSA] 
for the District of Columbia is an independent Federal agency 
created by the National Capital Revitalization and Self-
Government Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-33, title 
XI). CSOSA acquired the operational responsibilities for the 
former District agencies in charge of probation and parole, and 
houses the Pretrial Services Agency within its framework. The 
mission of CSOSA is to increase public safety, prevent crime, 
reduce recidivism, and support the fair administration of 
justice in close collaboration with the community. The CSOSA 
appropriation supports the Community Supervision Program which 
monitors or supervises approximately 15,000 offenders on a 
daily basis and the Pretrial Services Agency which monitors 
approximately 5,269 defendants at any given time and has placed 
over 1,788 defendants into substance abuse treatment.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $212,408,000, 
which is $8,918,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level 
and the same as the budget request. The Committee notes that 
the increased resources will enable CSOSA to expand the global 
positioning system [GPS] program capacity for surveillance of 
high-risk offenders and GPS data information sharing with 
District of Columbia public safety officials.
    The Committee is supportive of CSOSA's efforts to 
successfully return ex-offenders to their communities. For a 
number of years, CSOSA has worked with grassroots, nonprofit 
providers of transitional housing, including faith-based 
organizations, that offer counseling, mentoring, and life 
skills training to men and women returning home from prison. 
The Committee notes that this is a model program for the 
Nation.
    The Committee is encouraged that the Pretrial Services 
Agency reduced caseloads from 115 per officer in fiscal year 
2007 to 82 to per officer in fiscal year 2008. The Committee is 
concerned that even with the proposed budget increase, funding 
for CSOSA for offender contract treatment, including substance 
abuse, halfway-back residential sanctions, mental health and 
sex offender assessments, and transitional housing is 
constrained.

  FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE FOR THE DISTRICT OF 
                                COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $35,659,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      37,316,000
Committee recommendation................................      37,316,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Public Defender Service [PDS] for the District of 
Columbia, an independent organization established by a District 
of Columbia statute (16 D.C. Code 2-1601-1608), has a distinct 
mission to provide and promote quality legal representation 
services within the District of Columbia justice system. PDS 
provides legal representation to indigent adults and children 
facing loss of liberty and provides support in the form of 
training, consultation, and legal reference services to members 
of the local bar appointed as counsel in criminal, juvenile, 
and mental health cases involving indigent individuals.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a Federal payment to the Public 
Defender Service for the District of Columbia of $37,316,000, 
which is $1,657,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level 
and the same as the budget request. The increased funding will 
support continued progress on a new case management system as 
well as address inflationary increases in compensation and 
fixed costs.

 FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $16,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      20,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      20,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Approximately one-third of the District is served by a 
combined sewer system, constructed by the Federal Government in 
1890, in which both sanitary waste and storm water flow through 
the same pipes. When the collection system or the Blue Plains 
treatment plant reach capacity, typically during periods of 
heavy rainfall, the system is designed to overflow the excess 
water. This mixture of sewage and storm water runoff is 
discharged to the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers, Rock Creek, and 
tributary waters between 60 and 75 times each year. Under a 
judicial consent decree, the Water and Sewer Authority is 
undertaking a 20-year, $2,200,000,000 sewer construction 
program to reduce combined sewer overflows [CSO]. The program 
includes deep underground storage tunnels, side tunnels to 
reduce flooding, pump station rehabilitation, and the 
elimination of over a dozen CSO outfalls along the Potomac and 
Anacostia Rivers and Rock Creek. When completed in 2025, this 
project is expected to vastly improve water quality and 
significantly reduce debris in our Nation's capital waterways.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $20,000,000, 
to be matched by at least $20,000,000 provided by the Water and 
Sewer Authority, to continue implementation of the Long-Term 
Combined Sewer Overflow Control Plan. This is an increase of 
$4,000,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the 
same as the budget request.

      FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING COUNCIL

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $1,774,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       1,774,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,774,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Criminal Justice Coordinating Council for the District 
of Columbia [CJCC] is the primary forum in which District of 
Columbia criminal justice agencies can identify and address 
interagency coordination issues. Its mission is to address 
coordination difficulties among District of Columbia criminal 
justice agencies and address criminal justice issues, such as 
illegal drugs, juvenile justice, halfway houses, information 
technology, and identification of arrestees. The CJCC was 
originally established pursuant to a memorandum of agreement in 
May 1998 and operates as an independent working group to foster 
cooperation among the more than a dozen Federal and local 
governmental agencies which have law enforcement responsibility 
in our Nation's capital. As part of a local enactment in August 
2001, the CJCC was established as an independent agency within 
the District of Columbia.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $1,774,000 to 
the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council [CJCC]. This is the 
same as the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the 
budget request. The Committee directs the CJCC to submit annual 
performance measures in an annual report, which should also 
describe progress made on individual CJCC initiatives.

                FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR JUDICIAL COMMISSIONS

Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010...................................        $500,000
Committee recommendation................................         500,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure provides 
support to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals and 
Superior Court through reviewing and investigating allegations 
of judicial misconduct. The Judicial Nomination Commission 
recommends candidates to the President of the United States for 
nomination to judicial vacancies in these courts. In accordance 
with the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government 
Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-33), the Federal 
Government is responsible for financing of the District of 
Columbia Courts, including the operations of the District of 
Columbia Court of Appeals, Superior Court, the Court System, 
and the Capital Improvement Program. Although independent of 
the Courts by design, these two Commissions provide important 
functions within the judicial branch of local government in the 
District of Columbia.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee provides $500,000 as a Federal payment for 
the judicial commissions, of which $295,000 is designated for 
the Judicial Nomination Commission and $205,000 is designated 
for the Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure. This 
amount is $500,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and 
the same as the budget request. The Committee supports the 
rationale of recognizing these commissions as local judicial 
branch agencies for which Federal support for the operations is 
necessary.

  FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF THE 
                          DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $4,888,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................       1,000,000

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $1,000,000 to 
the Office of the Chief Financial Officer of the District of 
Columbia. This is $3,888,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted 
level and $1,000,000 above the budget request. These funds are 
for health, education, environmental, social service, and 
economic development initiatives in the District of Columbia. 
The Committee directs that of this amount, $1,000,000 shall be 
transferred to the Children's National Medical Center [CNMC] in 
Washington, DC, to meet the growing demand for critical 
intensive care services. With the funds provided, CNMC will 
renovate an unoccupied unit adjacent to the current pediatric 
intensive care unit, which will increase the number of beds 
from 23 to 33.
    The Committee is supportive of the CNMC and the critical 
services it provides to the District of Columbia's children and 
families. Founded in 1870 as a small community hospital to 
treat children orphaned by the Civil War, CNMC has grown into 
an internationally recognized team of more than 5,000 pediatric 
healthcare professionals serving children regionally, 
nationally, and internationally.
    The Committee commends CNMC for its role as both an 
international pediatric specialty care destination for children 
from nearly 20 countries, and as a safety net hospital for the 
children in its community. As the single largest provider of 
pediatric services in the District of Columbia, CNMC touches 
the lives of more than 600,000 children annually. From serving 
as the medical home for the District's children in foster care 
through its DC KIDS program to employing all the nurses in 163 
District public and public charter schools, CNMC is an integral 
part of the fabric of the District of Columbia.
    Because of a commitment of Federal resources for capital 
improvements, CNMC has successfully leveraged private 
philanthropic support. It has used Federal funds and private 
funds to expand and upgrade its facilities, including 
completion of a 54 bed neonatal intensive care unit, 
decontamination unit, quarantine facility and a 250 bed 
inpatient tower providing family centered accommodations and 
state-of-the art technology.
    The Committee directs CNMC as a grantee of funding under 
this account to submit a detailed budget and a comprehensive 
description of the activities to be carried out with the funds 
no later than June 1, 2010 to the Chief Financial Officer and 
the Committees on Appropriations. The Committee further directs 
that any funds made available to the grantee under this account 
must be spent primarily in the District of Columbia to benefit 
District of Columbia residents.

                 FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $54,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      74,400,000
Committee recommendation................................      75,400,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Committee continues its commitment to improving 
educational opportunities for the children of the District of 
Columbia. The Committee enhances a three-sector funding 
arrangement to provide Federal resources for the District of 
Columbia Public Schools, public charter schools, and for a 
scholarship program for low-income students to attend private 
schools. The Committee is encouraged by the progress to date to 
implement the Mayor's initiative to chart a new management 
course for the District's troubled public school system in 
response to Public Law 110-33, which vested authority over the 
school superintendent, operating budget, and capital program in 
the Mayor.
    The Committee acknowledges the daunting challenges this 
undertaking presents, given that District of Columbia public 
school students chronically perform well below national 
averages in reading and mathematics, but notes that progress 
has been made over the past 2 years under the leadership of the 
Chancellor to streamline bureaucracy, recruit new principals, 
expand course offerings available to students, and raise math 
and reading test scores. The Committee is further encouraged by 
plans to implement an innovative teacher compensation system 
that has the potential to attract and retain excellent teachers 
in District public schools.
    Public charter schools in the District of Columbia have 
grown considerably since the first two opened in 1996 and 
served 160 students. Today, there are 59 tuition-free, 
autonomous public charter schools on 95 campuses operating in 
the District, enrolling approximately 25,000 students, one-
third of all District of Columbia public school students. The 
District of Columbia School Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-
134), one of the strongest charter school laws in the Nation, 
guarantees charter school autonomy from the District of 
Columbia Public Schools and from the District government and 
mandates uniform per student funding of all public school 
students, both traditional and charter.
    The Committee is encouraged by the work being done by the 
District of Columbia Public Charter School Board to enforce a 
high standard of academic quality for all District charter 
schools and to close poorly performing schools. The Committee 
recognizes that the test scores of some of the charter schools 
are unacceptably low and calls on the District of Columbia 
Public Charter School Board to demand improvement on a timely 
basis, reform, or close these failing charter schools.
    Congress established the private school scholarship 
(voucher) program as a 5-year pilot in 2003. The intent of this 
program, operated by the Washington Scholarship Fund under a 
grant from the Department of Education, is to help increase the 
District of Columbia's capacity to provide parents, 
particularly low-income parents whose children attend low-
performing schools, more options for quality education. In 
school year 2008-2009, over 1,700 students participated in the 
program at 49 nonpublic schools.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $75,400,000, 
which is $21,400,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level 
and $1,000,000 above budget request. These funds are allocated 
as follows: $42,200,000 for the District of Columbia Public 
Schools to improve public school education; $20,000,000 to 
expand quality charter schools; and $13,200,000 to the 
Secretary of Education for opportunity scholarships for low-
income students in the District of Columbia, of which 
$1,000,000 may be used for program oversight and 
administration, and of which $1,000,000 may be used to 
administer testing of students to determine and compare 
academic performance of participating schools.

District of Columbia Public Schools

    The Committee directs the District of Columbia Public 
Schools to submit a detailed spending plan outlining specific 
activities no later than 60 days after enactment of this act 
and that this spending plan should contain a particular 
emphasis on the recruitment and retention of a high-quality 
teacher and principal workforce in District public schools.
    The District has 11,000 special needs students for whom the 
District must provide or secure educational services. District 
taxpayers currently spend $200,000,000 each year on private 
school tuition and transportation costs for more than 2,300 of 
these special needs students, one-fifth of all special needs 
students, that the public schools are unable to serve. The 
District of Columbia is required to comply with a Federal 
court-ordered consent decree entered in 2006 to settle a 9-year 
class action lawsuit brought by parents of special needs 
children. Under the judicial consent decree, the District is 
required to reduce its backlog of cases on placement 
assessments for individual special needs students, to fix its 
long-broken data management system, which makes it difficult 
for parents to access their children's files, and to hire more 
special needs staff. As part of the increased Federal funds 
provided for the District of Columbia Public Schools for fiscal 
year 2010 in this bill, the Committee expects the District to 
make substantial progress in achieving compliance with the 
consent decree, eliminating inadequacies in treatment and 
support for special needs students, and establishing more 
inclusive learning environments for these students within the 
District of Columbia Public Schools system.

District of Columbia Public Charter Schools

    The Committee notes that the District of Columbia's fiscal 
year 2010 Budget Act contains a decrease in the public charter 
schools per pupil facilities allowance in the amount of 
$7,300,000. The Committee also notes that, even before this 
decrease, public charter schools in the District receive 
approximately one-half as much facilities funding per student 
as does the District of Columbia Public Schools [DCPS]. The 
Committee believes that facilities funding should be equitably 
distributed among all District public school students and urges 
the Office of the State Superintendent of Education to 
distribute to the public charter schools, on a per pupil basis, 
$5,000,000 in additional facilities allowance funding. The 
Committee encourages the District of Columbia to fund the 
remaining $2,300,000 shortfall.
    With respect to the Federal payment for fiscal year 2010, 
the Committee directs the District of Columbia Public Charter 
School Board to submit to Congress, through the Office of the 
State Superintendent of Education [OSSE], a detailed spending 
plan outlining specific activities no later than 60 days after 
enactment of this act. This spending plan should contain a 
particular emphasis on enhancing the academic quality of 
existing charter schools, expanding the capacity of high-
performing charter schools, and instituting a robust 
performance management system to help identify low-performing 
schools and close them. The Committee expects that funding 
provided for charter schools will be used in accordance with 
the plan submitted. Federal funding made available through this 
appropriation directed to OSSE should be made available to the 
District of Columbia Public Charter School Board no later than 
30 days after enactment of this act.
    Over the years, public charter schools have moved into and 
revitalized former DCPS school buildings that otherwise would 
have been developed into condominiums or used for other 
commercial purposes. These buildings, including several 
historic structures, often long-abandoned and severely 
blighting neighborhoods, have been converted to public charter 
schools.
    The Committee further notes that the public charter schools 
have been permitted to enter into negotiations to acquire only 
a handful of the 24 school buildings recently declared surplus 
by the Mayor and Chancellor. It is evident to the Committee 
that the District of Columbia continues its long-standing 
practice of ignoring the public charter schools' right of first 
offer on surplus school buildings as outlined in the District 
of Columbia School Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-134). The 
Committee notes that this right applies to all school buildings 
no longer needed by DCPS, including ones in which the District 
of Columbia government would rather locate government agencies 
or use for economic development or other purposes. The 
Committee directs the Mayor of the District of Columbia to 
submit to the Committees on Appropriations, no later than 
January 15, 2010, a detailed fiscal year 2010-2014 public 
education facilities plan that will ensure public charter 
school access to surplus or underutilized DCPS space.
    Finally, the Committee reminds the government of the 
District of Columbia that students in public charter schools 
are to have access to the same publicly funded services that 
are offered to students in traditional public schools. These 
include school nurses, School Resource Officers, crossing 
guards, and mental health and other wrap-around services.

Opportunity Scholarship Program

    The Committee believes that any school enrolling a 
scholarship participant under the Opportunity Scholarship 
Program should satisfy certain minimum reasonable expectations 
as an educational setting. Therefore, the Committee expressly 
provides that none of the funds provided for opportunity 
scholarships shall be used by an eligible student to enroll in 
any participating school under the D.C. School Choice Incentive 
Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-199) unless (1) the participating 
school has and maintains a valid certificate of occupancy 
issued by the District of Columbia; and (2) the core subject 
matter teachers of the eligible students hold 4-year bachelor's 
degrees.
    The Committee emphasizes that the authorization for the 
private scholarship program expired on September 30, 2008. 
Accordingly, the Committee directs that funds provided for the 
scholarship program shall be used for currently enrolled 
participants rather than new scholarship applicants. The 
Committee is particularly sensitive to the potential impact of 
disrupting students' educational settings, but is also 
concerned about the potential damage of allowing students to 
remain in low-quality private schools.
    The purpose of the pilot opportunity scholarship program 
was to provide students with academic opportunities not 
available in low-performing public schools. Therefore, the 
Committee continues funding for current recipients of 
opportunity scholarships, but directs the Secretary of 
Education to submit a report to Congress assessing the quality 
of all participating schools. The Committee directs the 
Secretary to allow the use of scholarships after school year 
2010-11 only at schools performing at an academic level 
superior to District of Columbia public schools.
    For purposes of determining the performance of 
participating schools, the Committee further directs the 
Secretary to administer the same test to opportunity 
scholarship participants that will be administered to the 
District public school students in the 2009-2010 school year 
for the purposes of compiling the requested report. The 
Committee directs schools enrolling students participating in 
the opportunity scholarship program and the administrator of 
the program to comply fully and promptly with all requests by 
the Secretary for data and information necessary for the 
completion of the report to Congress. The Committee provides 
additional funding to the Secretary to administer the 
assessments and compile the report to Congress.
    In November 2007, the Government Accountability Office 
[GAO] detailed several program shortcomings in some of the 
participating schools in the scholarship program, including 
unsuitable learning environments, teachers without bachelor's 
degrees, and lack of occupancy permits. GAO also cited concerns 
about the sufficiency of financial controls and management 
issues, including failure to determine accreditation of 
participating schools.
    A federally mandated evaluation of the program is being 
conducted by the Department of Education's Institute of 
Education Sciences. Results assessing the overall impact of the 
program after the first 3 years of implementation, reflect that 
student test scores in reading improved by an equivalent of 3 
months of additional learning over 3 years, but that there was 
no statistically significant difference in scores for male 
students, in math scores for any students, or for students 
coming from public schools designated as ``in need of 
improvement.'' The program had a positive impact on parents' 
perception of safety and satisfaction but no impact on student 
reports of safety and satisfaction.

           FEDERAL PAYMENT TO JUMP START PUBLIC SCHOOL REFORM

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $20,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    With the enactment of Public Law 110-33, providing the 
Mayor of the District of Columbia with authority over the 
budget and administrative functions of the District of Columbia 
school system, the District of Columbia has launched an 
aggressive and comprehensive reform of its failing public 
school system. Under the direction of the Chancellor of the 
District of Columbia Public Schools, a multitude of critical 
initiatives are underway. For fiscal year 2009, Congress 
provided a one-time Federal contribution to support the 
recruitment and training of principals and other school 
leaders; the development of optimal school programs; and the 
enhancement of the District's data reporting capabilities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee provides no funding in this account for 
fiscal year 2010, the same as the budget request. The Committee 
provides funds for local education initiatives through the 
``Federal Payment for School Improvement'' account within this 
title.

          FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR CONSOLIDATED LABORATORY FACILITY

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $21,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      15,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      15,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The District's forensics laboratory capacity has not kept 
pace with the innovations in the field and is therefore unable 
to meet the demands of the current workload. As a result, the 
District is forced to seek help from the FBI crime laboratory 
in Quantico, Virginia and other Federal agencies. Because the 
FBI has its own workload capacity, it strictly limits the 
evidence it will process for the District in violent crime 
cases.
    The lack of capacity and outmoded technology have led to 
many so-called ``cold'' or unsolved crime cases in the 
District. The District of Columbia Metropolitan Police 
Department [MPD] has a backlog of thousands of sexual assault 
and homicide cases, and the volume continues to grow. 
Currently, the FBI reports that approximately 30 percent of 
their DNA analysis is casework from MPD. Further, the Drug 
Enforcement Agency performs all of MPD's drug analysis on 
controlled dangerous substances, and the Bureau of Alcohol, 
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has tested approximately 100 
arson cases on behalf of the District.
    A new comprehensive laboratory, housing both anti-terrorism 
and criminal forensic components under one roof, will not only 
allow the District to more effectively and efficiently process 
crime cases, but it will be an essential element in processing 
evidence associated with potential bioterrorism attacks.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $15,000,000 
for costs associated with completing the construction of a new 
comprehensive laboratory facility in the District of Columbia. 
This is $6,000,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, 
and the same as the budget request. The Committee directs that 
this Federal payment be equally matched with local funds.
    The Committee notes that over the past 5 fiscal years 
Congress has provided over $43,000,000 in Federal payments, 
matched by over $160,000,000 in local investments. When 
completed, the facility will provide services to all agencies 
within the borders of the District. United States Capitol 
Police, United States Park Police, and the United States Secret 
Service all submit evidence to the District's Firearms Unit, 
which will be housed in the consolidated lab. The public health 
lab portion of the facility will allow the District to join the 
national Laboratory Response Network.
    The Committee expects that the $15,000,000 provided will be 
the final Federal payment for the project. The Committee is 
aware of the withdrawal of a construction contract award in 
June 2009 and is concerned that the anticipated scheduled 
completion in the fall of 2011 may be impacted. The Committee 
urges the Mayor to keep the Committee regularly informed of the 
progress on the project.

              FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR THE D.C. NATIONAL GUARD

Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      $2,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The fiscal 2010 budget request seeks a new Federal payment 
of $2,000,000 for the D.C. National Guard's D.C. Government 
Operations. The D.C. National Guard is a Federal, rather than a 
local, entity and responds to orders of the President of the 
United States who is the Commander-in-Chief of the D.C. 
National Guard pursuant to law [District of Columbia Official 
Code Sec. 49-409 and Executive Order No. 11485 (October 1, 
1969)]. Unlike a governor of a State, the Mayor is not 
authorized to deploy the National Guard under any 
circumstances. In fiscal 2009, local funds support 33 civilian 
administrative personnel, a Federal Facilities Operations and 
Maintenance Activities grant supports facilities maintenance 
currently performed by an additional 39 civilian personnel, and 
the D.C. National Guard receives appropriations annually 
through the Department of Defense Appropriations Act.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee does not recommend a new Federal payment for 
the D.C. National Guard. The Committee provides a payment for 
the D.C. National Guard under the Federal Payment for Emergency 
Planning and Security account within the bill. The D.C. 
National Guard also receives Federal funding through the 
Department of Defense appropriation.

            FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING

Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     $19,200,000
Committee recommendation................................................

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The fiscal 2010 budget request seeks a new Federal payment 
of $19,200,000 to help transform the delivery of services and 
reduce chronic and family homelessness in the District of 
Columbia. As proposed, the requested funds would augment a 
local investment in the Mayor's ``Housing First'' initiative to 
develop and provide permanent supportive housing and wrap-
around services. The Committee notes that due to the downturn 
in the economy, the District proposes to decrease its budget 
using local funds for this program from the $12,071,000 to 
$10,071,000, which will allow the District to continue to 
support the 427 individuals and 80 families currently housed 
through Housing First.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    While the Committee lauds the Mayor for his efforts to 
fulfill his pledge to replace homeless shelters with housing 
and address the critical needs of the most severely disabled 
and longest-term homeless individuals and families in the 
District, the Committee is unable to support the proposed 
Federal contribution at this time. The Committee strongly urges 
the District of Columbia government to evaluate and take 
advantage of Federal grant funding available through the U.S. 
Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Committee 
further notes the work of the Urban Institute and its June 2008 
report, ``Transforming the District of Columbia's Public 
Homeless Assistance System,'' which offers an array of 
recommendations for engaging developers in programs to move the 
chronically homeless into permanent supportive housing and 
cites exemplary best practices and experiences of other 
communities in the country that have successfully mobilized 
resources for permanent supportive housing.

          FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR RECONNECTING DISCONNECTED YOUTH

Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      $5,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The fiscal 2010 budget request seeks a new Federal payment 
of $5,000,000 to support a local initiative designed to 
significantly reduce the number of young people in the District 
of Columbia who are currently not connected to positive work or 
school activities or at risk of becoming disconnected from 
these critical influences. The District of Columbia proposes to 
use Federal funds to augment a local investment in new 
neighborhood-based service coalitions to expand opportunities 
to youth and families by engaging community-based organizations 
in the neighborhoods where the youths reside and building the 
capacity of neighborhoods to serve their residents.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee does not recommend a new Federal payment to 
the District of Columbia for reconnecting disconnected youth. 
In fiscal year 2009, this initiative was funded predominantly 
with local resources, augmented with a small amount of private 
grants. The Committee appreciates that in this uncertain 
economic climate and challenging local budgetary constraints, 
the District diverted local resources that may have otherwise 
been devoted to this program to other more pressing, higher 
priority needs. The Committee is unable to support a new 
Federal investment at this time, and urges the District of 
Columbia government to explore and exhaust other Federal grant 
options and private sources to support this program in fiscal 
year 2010.

        FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR CENTRAL LIBRARY AND BRANCH LOCATIONS

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $7,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Many of the District's public libraries are in a state of 
significant disrepair and are poorly equipped. The adult 
illiteracy rate in the District of Columbia is 37 percent. In 
many major metropolitan areas around the country, new libraries 
have revitalized many distressed neighborhoods. A Blue Ribbon 
Task Force of local and national experts recommended the 
creation of a state-of-the-art library system to add multi-
lingual support, hundreds of new computers with broadband 
technology, and deep reference materials and children's 
programs.
    The District of Columbia Public Library is undergoing a 
transformation that includes services, programs, collections, 
and buildings. The Library is in the process of rebuilding four 
neighborhood libraries--Anacostia, Benning, Tenley-Friendship, 
and Watha T. Daniel/Shaw. Old buildings have been razed and 
library services are being provided by interim facilities in 
the four neighborhoods. Construction of the new state-of-the-
art libraries is scheduled to begin in late summer 2008 and 
expected to be completed by the end of 2009 in order to open to 
the public in the spring of 2010.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends no new funding as a Federal 
payment contribution toward the costs of renovating and 
rehabilitating District of Columbia public libraries.
    The Committee is pleased that the District library system 
is proceeding with a long-needed, multi-year facilities 
modernization project, with four new libraries under 
construction, and investing in literacy initiatives that will 
complement and support the Mayor's education reform agenda.

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR OF THE DISTRICT OF 
                                COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $3,388,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee does not recommend a Federal payment to the 
Executive Office of the Mayor of the District of Columbia. This 
is $3,388,000 below the fiscal year 2009 level and the same as 
the budget request.

                     DELAYS IN PROPERTY CONVEYANCES

    The Committee is aware that certain conveyances of land 
authorized by the Federal Government and the District of 
Columbia Government and Real Property Act of 2006 (Public Law 
109-396) have not yet occurred. The delay in completing these 
conveyances has resulted in the continued deterioration of a 
historically significant property, the Old Naval Hospital on 
Capitol Hill. This property was a small Civil War-era hospital 
and is the last significant un-restored historic building on 
Capitol Hill. The property has been through a competitive 
process conducted by the District of Columbia government to 
choose an operating entity to be granted lease for the property 
for the purpose of its complete historic renovation and 
ultimate operation as a community center dedicated to lifetime 
education. The Committee is concerned that the cost and 
viability of the restoration of this property will continue to 
diminish if the hospital property remains tied to the larger 
transfers in the act, and urges the General Services 
Administration, the Architect of the Capitol, and the District 
of Columbia government to expedite the exchange of land 
conveyances authorized by Public Law 109-396.

              DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LOCAL OPERATING BUDGET

    The Committee recommends a total of $8,858,278,000 for the 
operating expenses of the District of Columbia as contained in 
the fiscal year 2010 budget submitted to the Congress by the 
government of the District of Columbia in June 2009. Of the 
total, $5,721,742,000 is from local funds, $2,575,447,000 is 
from Federal grant funds, $556,429,000 is from other funds, and 
$4,660,000 is from private funds. The Committee directs that 
any changes to the financial plan as submitted by the District 
must follow the reprogramming guidelines.

                                TITLE V

                          INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

             Administrative Conference of the United States

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $1,500,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       2,625,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,500,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Administrative Conference of the United States [ACUS] 
is a newly reauthorized independent agency and advisory 
committee that was created to study administrative processes in 
order to recommend improvements to Congress and agencies.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,500,000 for ACUS, $1,125,000 
below the budget request and the same as the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level. The Committee reminds ACUS that pursuant to 
section 609 of division D of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 
2009 (Public Law 111-8), not to exceed 50 percent of 
unobligated balances from salaries and expenses remaining 
available at the end of fiscal year 2009 shall remain available 
until September 30, 2010. The Committee expects ACUS to use 
these carryover funds, in addition to the recommended funds, 
for fiscal year 2010 operating expenses.

               Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................       1,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation is an 
independent agency established by Congress in 1992 (Public Law 
102-281) to encourage and support research, study, and labor 
designed to produce new discoveries in all fields of endeavor 
for the benefit of mankind. Its mission is accomplished through 
the sponsorship of national competitions designed to recognize 
and award cutting-edge innovation in the fields of homeland 
security, life sciences, and education. During its 16-year 
existence, the Foundation has awarded approximately $7,600,000 
to worthy American scientists, student inventors, and exemplary 
teachers who inspire despite especially challenging educational 
environments or personal physical disabilities.
    The Committee acknowledges that initial funding for the 
Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation was derived from the 
sale of three denominations of specially minted coins sold by 
the United States Mint from August 1992 through June 1993. 
Revenues from the coin sales surcharges were deposited in the 
Christopher Columbus Fellowship Fund at the Department of the 
Treasury, and made available to the Foundation. To address the 
fact that the coin sales revenues had been depleted, Congress 
authorized funding for the Christopher Columbus Fellowship 
Foundation in the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 
111-8).

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000 for 
the Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation. This is the 
same as the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $1,000,000 above 
the budget request.

                  Commodity Futures Trading Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $146,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     160,600,000
Committee recommendation................................     177,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC] was 
established as an independent agency by the Commodity Futures 
Trading Commission Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 1389; 7 U.S.C. 4a).
    The Commission administers the Commodity Exchange Act, 7 
U.S.C. section 1, et seq. The 1974 Act brought under Federal 
regulation futures trading in all goods, articles, services, 
rights, and interests; commodity options trading; and leverage 
trading in gold and silver bullion and coins; and otherwise 
strengthened the regulation of the commodity futures trading 
industry. It established a comprehensive regulatory structure 
to oversee the volatile futures trading complex.
    The CFTC is the sole Federal regulator responsible for 
overseeing the futures markets by encouraging competitiveness 
and efficiency, ensuring market integrity, and protecting 
market participants against manipulation, abusive trading 
practices, fraud, and other unscrupulous activities. Effective 
oversight by the CFTC enables the markets to better serve their 
designated functions of providing a price discovery mechanism 
and a means to offset price risk.
    Programs in support of the overall mission include market 
surveillance analysis and research; registration, audits, and 
contract markets; enforcement; reparations; proceedings; legal 
counsel; agency direction; and administrative support services. 
CFTC activities are carried out in Washington, DC and in 
regional offices located in Chicago, New York City, and Kansas 
City.
    The enacted 2008 farm bill (Public Law 110-246) 
reauthorized the CFTC and made several amendments to the 
Commodity Exchange Act to (1) clarify the CFTC's jurisdiction 
over retail financial contracts based on foreign currencies; 
(2) make the CFTC's anti-fraud authority applicable to certain 
off-exchange or over-the-counter derivatives contracts; (3) 
increase civil monetary and criminal penalties for violations; 
(4) permit cross-margining of accounts in security futures and 
options; and (5) establish CFTC regulation over certain 
exchange-like trading facilities that are currently exempt from 
most regulation.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $177,000,000 
for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. This is 
$31,000,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and 
$16,400,000 above the budget request. The Committee supports 
the need for significantly increased resources for the CFTC to 
ensure appropriate oversight of the futures markets, which are 
expanding steadily in volume and new users, and rapidly 
evolving in their complexity and diversity.
    The Committee further acknowledges the need for CFTC to 
make mission-critical investments in technology to sort through 
the millions of pieces of information generated by markets, 
much of it electronic, daily. Proper oversight of markets 
requires transparency. The backbone of the CFTC's market 
surveillance program is the large trader reporting system. The 
amount and detail of trade data collected and analyzed at the 
CFTC is unprecedented among regulatory financial agencies.
    In the past decade, trading volume has increased more than 
ten-fold--reaching well over 3.4 billion trades in 2008. 
Actively traded contracts have quintupled--from 258 in 1997 to 
1,521 in 2008. The notional value of contracts traded per day 
has experienced exponential growth from $4,000,000,000 in 1976 
to an estimated $5,000,000,000,000 in 2008. Despite this 
phenomenal surge in activity, CFTC staffing levels have not 
kept pace, and in fact, have dropped 21 percent. The 
globalized, electronic, and round-the-clock nature of the 
marketplace and the emergence of derivatives and hedge funds 
have transformed the regulatory environment.
    Additional authorities provided through enactment of the 
2008 farm bill (Public Law 110-246), coupled with escalating 
public concern about record energy and agricultural commodity 
prices, and compounded by a growing influx of financial funds 
into the futures markets, make the CFTC's staffing situation 
unsustainable. These combined factors underscore the importance 
of the Committee's recommended funding increase.
    The Committee commends the CFTC for its decision to conduct 
a series of hearings to solicit input from consumers, 
businesses, and market participants on how the CFTC can best 
use its existing authorities, with the first hearing focused on 
whether Federal speculative limits should be set by the CFTC 
for all commodities of finite supply, particularly energy 
commodities, as well as a review of the appropriateness of 
exemptions from limits for certain market participants.
    The Committee is also pleased that the CFTC is taking steps 
to improve the transparency of market data to better inform 
market participants and the public.
    The Committee is aware of discussions to harmonize 
regulatory oversight of futures and securities products to 
achieve greater protection of investors, ensure market 
integrity, and promote price transparency. Building on previous 
work, the Committee directs the Government Accountability 
Office to report to Congress not later than March 1, 2010 on 
the extent of conflicts in statutes and regulations with 
respect to the similarities in futures and securities and 
provide recommendations that would reduce or eliminate 
discrepancies and gaps, enhance regulatory effectiveness and 
efficiency, and heighten market transparency.

                   Consumer Product Safety Commission


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $105,404,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     107,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     115,000,000

                          program description

    The Consumer Product Safety Commission [CPSC] is an 
independent regulatory agency that was established on May 14, 
1973, and is responsible for protecting the public against 
unreasonable risks of injury from consumer products; assisting 
consumers to evaluate the comparative safety of consumer 
products; developing uniform safety standards for consumer 
products and minimizing conflicting State and local 
regulations; and promoting research and investigation into the 
causes and prevention of product-related deaths, illnesses, and 
injuries.
    In carrying out its mandate, the CPSC establishes mandatory 
product safety standards, where appropriate, to reduce the 
unreasonable risk of injury to consumers from consumer 
products; helps industry develop voluntary safety standards; 
bans unsafe products if it finds that a safety standard is not 
feasible; monitors recalls of defective products; informs and 
educates consumers about product hazards; conducts research and 
develops test methods; collects and publishes injury and hazard 
data, and promotes uniform product regulations by governmental 
units.
    On August 14, 2008, Congress reauthorized the Commission by 
enacting the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 
[CPSIA] (Public Law 110-314). CPSIA represents the most 
substantial change in the Consumer Product Safety Commission's 
authorities since the creation of the Commission. Among other 
things, it enhances the Commission's recall authority, 
streamlines the rulemaking process, provides for the creation 
of a new searchable database of consumer product complaints, 
and requires product certification.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $115,000,000 for the Consumer 
Product Safety Commission, which is $9,596,000 above the fiscal 
year 2009 funding level and $8,000,000 above the budget 
request.
    This increased funding level is provided for the Consumer 
Product Safety Commission to carry out its increased 
responsibilities under the CPSIA. The Committee is aware that 
in fiscal year 2009 CPSC has received hundreds of complaints 
about health and safety problems associated with drywall 
imported from China. The Committee is appreciative of the fact 
that CPSC is leading a coordinated, comprehensive, and multi-
faceted Federal investigation of imported drywall products. The 
Committee notes that funds provided in fiscal year 2010 will be 
available to support CPSC's investigation of imported and 
domestic drywall products.
    Small Business Compliance.--CPSIA established many vital 
safeguards for ensuring that children's products are safe. In 
December 2008, the CPSC sought comments from the public on 
section 102 of CPSIA, which requires testing of certain 
children's products. In particular, the CPSC sought comments 
regarding testing component parts of children's products rather 
than testing the final product. The Committee believes that 
small businesses could benefit greatly by protocol and guidance 
from the CPSC for those circumstances under which the testing 
of component parts is sufficient for a small business to 
demonstrate that its products are in compliance with section 
102. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the CPSC expedite 
the issuance of such guidance.
    Within the funds provided, the Committee has included 
sufficient resources for the Commission to educate micro-
businesses, such as home-based businesses, thrift stores, 
second-hand shops and operators of church fairs, about 
compliance with CPSIA.

                     Election Assistance Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $17,959,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      16,530,000
Committee recommendation................................      16,530,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Election Assistance Commission [EAC] was created by the 
Help America Vote Act of 2002 [HAVA] (Public Law 107-252). 
Under HAVA, the EAC's role is to promulgate voluntary State 
guidelines for election systems, develop a national 
certification program for voting equipment, and provide related 
guidance. The EAC is also charged with awarding grants to 
improve election administration and to enhance election 
equipment.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee provides $16,530,000 for EAC's administrative 
expenses, which is $1,429,000 less than the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level and the same as the budget request. The Committee 
bill requires that $3,250,000 of these funds be transferred to 
the National Institute for Standards and Technology for 
technical assistance related to the development of voluntary 
State voting systems guidelines.

                        ELECTION REFORM PROGRAMS

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $106,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      52,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      52,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation provides grants for grant programs 
authorized by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (Public Law 
107-252) and for related grant programs to improve the 
administration of elections.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $52,000,000 for election reform 
programs. This amount is $54,000,000 below the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level and the same as the budget request.

                   Federal Communications Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $341,875,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     335,794,000
Committee recommendation................................     335,794,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Federal Communications Commission [FCC] is charged with 
regulating interstate and international communications by 
radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable. The FCC is also 
charged with promoting the safety of life and property through 
wire and radio communications. The mandate of the FCC under the 
Communications Act is to make available to all people of the 
United States a rapid, efficient, nationwide, and worldwide 
wire and radio communication service. The FCC performs five 
major functions to fulfill this charge: (1) spectrum 
allocation, (2) creating rules to promote fair competition and 
protect consumers where required by market conditions, (3) 
authorization of service, (4) enhancing public safety and 
homeland security, and (5) enforcement.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation provides $335,794,000 for the 
salaries and expenses of the Federal Communications Commission 
[FCC], of which $335,794,000 is to be derived from the 
collection of fees. The recommendation is $6,081,000 below the 
fiscal year 2009 enacted level and is equal to the budget 
request.
    Universal Service Fund.--The Committee notes that Congress 
established the Universal Service Fund [USF] in 1996 to help 
provide communities across the country with affordable 
telecommunications services. The Committee continues to be 
concerned about the FCC's lack of proper oversight over USF 
programs, which in fiscal year 2010 are estimated to expend 
over $8,800,000,000. While FCC has delegated the operational 
management of USF to the Universal Service Administrative 
Company [USAC], FCC continues to have responsibility for the 
management and oversight of USF programs.
    The Committee fully supports auditing and investigations of 
Federal spending, including of USF programs and recipients. 
Auditing and other oversight activities are critical to help 
ensure proper stewardship of taxpayer dollars. However, the 
Committee is very concerned that recent audits of 
telecommunications providers receiving USF support have been 
unnecessarily burdensome. The Committee directs the FCC to work 
with USAC and the FCC Inspector General [IG] to develop more 
uniform audit processes that are as consistent as possible so 
that telecommunications providers are fully informed of 
document retention and other audit requirements. The Committee 
also directs the FCC to work with USAC and the FCC IG to ensure 
that all USF auditors are familiar with the telecommunications 
industry.
    The Committee directs FCC to report to the Committee on 
Appropriations within 60 days of enactment of this act with 
detailed information on all audit activity since fiscal year 
2007 conducted by FCC, USAC and the FCC IG, including the cost 
of audit activity, audit methodologies, and the results of such 
audits. The report shall also include detailed information on 
FCC's plans for continued required reviews under the Improper 
Payments Information Act (Public Law 107-300), USAC's plans for 
continued auditing, and plans for FCC, the FCC IG, and USAC to 
communicate more effectively to USF recipients. Finally, the 
Committee notes that a detailed analysis of the FCC IG audit 
program performed by USAC has reported no instance of fraud in 
any of the program's audits, and has recognized a generally 
high level of program compliance.
    Rural Health Care Pilot Program.--The Committee notes that 
the Commission dedicated over $417,000,000 for the construction 
of 67 statewide or regional broadband telehealth networks in 42 
States and 3 U.S. territories under the Rural Health Care Pilot 
Program [RHCPP]. This program is designed to significantly 
increase access to acute, primary, and preventive healthcare in 
rural America.
    The Committee notes that there is a particular need for 
broadband access in rural healthcare, where isolated clinics 
can save lives by using advanced communications technology to 
tap the expertise of modern urban medical centers.
    The Commission's RHCPP will eventually support the 
connection of more than 6,000 public and nonprofit health care 
providers nationwide to broadband telehealth networks. The 
healthcare facilities participating in the Pilot Program 
include hospitals, clinics, universities and research centers, 
behavioral health sites, correctional facility clinics, and 
community health centers. Telehealth and telemedicine services 
provide patients in rural areas with access to critically 
needed medical specialists in a variety of practices, including 
cardiology, pediatrics, and radiology, in some instances 
without leaving their homes or communities. Intensive care 
doctors and nurses can monitor critically ill patients around 
the clock and video conferencing allows specialists and mental 
health professionals to deliver medical care for patients in 
different rural locations, often hundreds of miles away.
    The Committee is very concerned that, to date, the 
Commission has made funding commitments for only 6 of the 67 
approved projects. The Committee therefore directs the 
Commission to place a high priority on the roll-out of this 
vital pilot initiative. The Committee specifically notes that 
the Commission has not made any funds available for the New 
England Telehealth Consortium, the largest regional rural 
telehealth network in the country. This project will serve 
rural residents in over 300 sites across Vermont, New 
Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Maine. The Committee directs the 
Commission to better manage the Universal Service 
Administrative Company and its role in providing these funding 
commitments.
    Broadcast Television Standards.--The Committee continues to 
be concerned about the declining standards of broadcast 
television and the impact this decline is having on America's 
children. In broadcast television, sexual content, foul 
language, and violence have greatly increased over the past 
decade. The Committee directs the FCC to continue to report to 
Congress on the issues associated with resurrecting a broadcast 
industry code of conduct for content of programming that, if 
adhered to by the broadcast industry, would protect against the 
further erosion of broadcasting standards.
    The Committee has included language (sec. 501) to extend 
FCC's exemption from the Anti-deficiency Act [ADA] until 
December 31, 2010. The ADA contains accounting rules which 
could complicate the operation of the FCC's universal service 
electronic rate program.
    The Committee has included language (sec. 502) that 
prohibits the FCC from enacting certain recommendations 
regarding universal service that were made to it by the Joint 
Board of FCC members and State utility commissioners. The 
recommendation would limit universal support to one line. This 
would be harmful to small businesses, especially in rural 
areas, which need a second line for a fax or for other business 
purposes.

                 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation


                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2009....................................   ($27,495,000)
Budget estimate, 2010...................................    (37,942,000)
Committee recommendation................................    (37,942,000)

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The FDIC Office of Inspector General [OIG] conducts audits, 
investigations, and other reviews to assist and augment the 
FDIC's contribution to the stability of, and public confidence 
in, the Nation's financial system. A separate appropriation 
more effectively ensures the OIG's independence consistent with 
the Inspector General Act of 1978 and other legislation.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $37,942,000 for the FDIC inspector 
general, the same as the budget request and $10,447,000 more 
than the fiscal year 2009 enacted level. Funds are to be 
derived by transfer from the Deposit Insurance Fund and the 
Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation [FSLIC] 
resolution fund.

                      Federal Election Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $63,618,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      64,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      67,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Federal Election Commission [FEC] was created through 
the 1974 Amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 
1971 (Public Law 93-443). Consistent with its duty of executing 
our Nation's Federal campaign finance laws, and in pursuit of 
its mission of maintaining public faith in the integrity of the 
Federal campaign finance system, FEC conducts three major 
regulatory programs: (1) providing public disclosure of funds 
raised and spent to influence Federal elections; (2) enforcing 
compliance with restrictions on contributions and expenditures 
made to influence Federal elections; and (3) administering 
public financing of Presidential campaigns.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $67,000,000 for the Federal 
Election Commission, $3,000,000 more than the budget request 
and $3,382,000 more than the fiscal year 2009 enacted level. 
The Committee recommends the increase in funding over the 
budget request to enable the FEC to maintain current staffing 
levels and services, address audit findings related to 
information technology, enhance public access to electronic 
records, and address increased workload demands.

                   Federal Labor Relations Authority


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $22,674,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      24,773,000
Committee recommendation................................      24,773,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Federal Labor Relations Authority [FLRA] is an 
independent administrative Federal agency created by title VII 
of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-454) 
with a mission to carry out five statutory responsibilities in 
relation to the Federal workforce: (1) determining the 
appropriateness of units for labor organization representation; 
(2) resolving complaints of unfair labor practices; (3) 
adjudicating exceptions to arbitrator's awards; (4) 
adjudicating legal issues relating to the duty to bargain; and 
(5) resolving impasses during negotiations.
    The FLRA's authority is divided by law and by delegation 
among a three-member authority and an Office of General 
Counsel, appointed by the President and subject to Senate 
confirmation; and the Federal Service Impasses Panel, which 
consists of seven part-time members appointed by the President.
    In addition, the FLRA is engaged in case-related 
interventions, training and facilitation of labor-management 
partnerships, and resolving disputes. FLRA promotes labor-
management cooperation by providing training and assistance to 
labor organizations and agencies on resolving disputes, 
facilitates the creation of partnerships, and trains the 
parties on rights and responsibilities under the Federal Labor 
Relations Management statute.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,773,000 
for the Federal Labor Relations Authority. This amount is the 
same as the budget request and $2,099,000 above the fiscal year 
2009 enacted level.
    The Committee supports the efforts of the FLRA in reducing 
the caseload backlog and is pleased with the planned movement 
towards electronic filing of public records.

                        Federal Trade Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $259,200,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     287,200,000
Committee recommendation................................     289,300,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Federal Trade Commission [FTC] administers a variety of 
Federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. Activities in 
the antitrust area include detection and elimination of illegal 
collusion, anticompetitive mergers, unlawful single-firm 
conduct, and injurious vertical agreements. The FTC regulates 
advertising practices, service industry practices, marketing 
practices, and credit practices as it addresses fraud and other 
consumer concerns.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation provides $289,300,000. The 
recommendation is $30,100,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level and $2,100,000 above the budget request.
    The amounts recommended above the budget request are 
provided to enhance consumer protection activities and to 
support required activities related to the health information 
technology provisions included in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 [ARRA] (Public Law 111-5).
    Of the amounts provided, $102,000,000 is derived from Hart-
Scott-Rodino pre-merger filing fees and $21,000,000 is derived 
from Do-Not-Call fees. The total amount of direct 
appropriations for this account is therefore $166,300,000. The 
Committee notes that this change reflects a net decrease in 
offsetting fee collection receipts since last year.
    Consumer Protection.--Additional funds shall include 
support for investigations into fraud related to the housing 
crisis, including mortgage and other financial services fraud. 
The Committee continues to be concerned about the role that 
deceptive and misleading practices in the financial services 
industry have played in the recent housing crisis. Additional 
consumer protection funding shall also support investigations 
regarding unfair and deceptive practices associated with 
Federal programs promoting economic stimulus and stabilization, 
including ARRA and the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 
2008 (Public Law 110-343, known commonly as the Troubled Assets 
Relief Program, or TARP). The Committee is concerned that 
fraudulent activity conducted under the disguise of these 
programs can be particularly deceptive to consumers because 
such schemes use language and symbols associated with 
Government programs to gain the attention of consumers.
    Do-Not-Call Initiative.--The recommendation includes 
$21,000,000 for the FTC Do-Not-Call initiative and 
implementation of the Telemarketing Sales Rule [TSR], of which 
the entire amount is to be derived from the collection of fees. 
The Do-Not-Call initiative was launched pursuant to the FTC's 
amended TSR to establish a national database of telephone 
numbers of consumers who choose not to receive telephone 
solicitations from telemarketers. The Do-Not-Call initiative 
has received broad support from, and will provide significant 
benefits to, consumers from all corners of the United States.
    Gas and Diesel Prices.--The Committee continues to be 
concerned with the potential for market manipulation and 
anticompetitive behavior in the oil and natural gas industries. 
The FTC is encouraged to continue its investigations and other 
activities related to these concerns. The Committee directs the 
FTC to keep the Committee apprised of findings made regarding 
fuel prices, as well as other planned activities and 
investigations regarding the oil and gas industries.
    Child Protection.--In September 2000, the FTC released a 
report entitled: ``Marketing Violent Entertainment to Children: 
A Review of Self-Regulation and Industry Practices in the 
Motion Picture, Music Recording & Electronic Game Industries.'' 
The report was highly critical of the entertainment industry 
and its persistent and calculated marketing of violent games, 
movies, and music to children. In response to this report, the 
entertainment industry has promised to impose tougher 
regulations on itself and to voluntarily comply with the 
report's recommendation. The FTC should continue with, and 
expand upon, its efforts in this area. The Committee directs 
the Commission to continue to engage in consumer research and 
workshops, underage shopper-retail compliance surveys, and 
marketing data collection and analysis.
    Used Motor Vehicles.--The Committee notes that the FTC has 
been petitioned by several consumer groups to modify the Used 
Motor Vehicle Trade Regulation Rule to inform prospective 
purchasers of used Chrysler vehicles that, as a result of the 
Chrysler bankruptcy proceeding, the restructured Chrysler 
company is absolved of liability for product defect claims 
arising from vehicles that were manufactured pre-bankruptcy. 
The Committee directs the FTC to report to the Committee within 
90 days of enactment on how the Commission plans to inform 
potential purchasers of used cars about the extent to which the 
Chrysler and the General Motors bankruptcy proceedings may have 
limited the rights of consumers to recover for product defect 
or asbestos exposure claims associated with used Chrysler and 
General Motors vehicles.

                  Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................      $8,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

\1\Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-32).

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission was established in 
the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-
21) to examine the causes, domestic and global, of the current 
financial and economic crisis in the United States. An 
emergency appropriation of $8,000,000, to remain available 
until February 15, 2011, for the necessary expenses of the 
Commission was provided in the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 
2009 (Public Law 111-32).

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends no new funding for the Financial 
Crisis Inquiry Commission. This is the same as the budget 
request.

                    General Services Administration


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The General Services Administration [GSA] was established 
by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 
(Public Law 81-152) when Congress mandated the consolidation of 
the Federal Government's real property and administrative 
services. GSA is organized into the Public Buildings Service, 
the Federal Acquisition Service, the Office of Government-wide 
Policy, and the Office of Citizen Services.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    Annual 5-Year Plans for Federal Buildings and Border 
Stations.--The Committee is disappointed that the 2010 Budget 
request did not include the two 5-year plans required by the 
Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8). The 
Committee reiterates the requirement that the GSA include in 
its annual budget submission to Congress, detailed 5-year plans 
for Federal building and land port of entry (border station) 
construction projects with yearly updates of total project 
future funding needs for construction. The 5-year plan for 
border stations shall be a coordinated effort between GSA and 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
    Los Angeles Courthouse.--The Committee remains quite 
troubled by the lack of progress achieved in constructing a new 
courthouse in Los Angeles, California. Designated as the 
judiciary's top priority and a judicial emergency in 2000, the 
Los Angeles courthouse project has received more than 
$33,000,000 for courthouse design and for the purchase and 
preparation of the construction site. In 2004 and 2005 Congress 
appropriated more than $350,000,000 for construction of the 
courthouse. Numerous problems followed, and a construction 
contract was never awarded. Despite the fact that Congress has 
appropriated nearly $400,000,000 for the project, the project 
has completely stalled, and there appears to be little 
likelihood that construction will begin in the foreseeable 
future. Nearly 10 years after being identified as a judicial 
emergency, today, the Los Angeles courthouse project remains 
the judiciary's highest construction priority.
    The Committee appreciates the efforts GSA has made in 
recent years in trying to find a cost-effective solution. 
According to a GAO report (GAO-08-889), GSA has developed eight 
different proposals to house the court, some of which involve 
splitting the District Court between two locations. GSA 
reported to the Committee that the judiciary has been steadfast 
in opposing alternatives other than a single courthouse that 
will house all the District Judges and that there is no 
consensus on the best way to proceed.
    The Committee recognizes the desirability of consolidating 
all the District Judges in one new courthouse. However, if this 
is an essential objective of the project, GSA and the judiciary 
must pursue the design of a much more modest facility than has 
been proposed to date and must ensure that the existing Roybal 
Federal Building and Courthouse location is fully utilized. The 
Committee directs GSA to work with the judiciary in developing 
a cost-effective design proposal that would not require 
splitting of the District Court. GSA shall report quarterly to 
the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives, beginning in January 2010, on progress made in 
reaching a mutually agreeable solution to this longstanding 
problem. The Committee urges GSA and the judiciary to work 
collaboratively and creatively, considering options such as 
courtroom sharing, to meet this challenge.
    Yuma, Arizona Courthouse.--The Committee has not included 
construction funding for a new courthouse in Yuma, Arizona. 
Instead, the committee directs GSA to proceed expeditiously to 
enter into a contract for a non-prospectus level lease-
construct courthouse facility that is critically needed in 
Yuma. This Southwest border court lacks the space and security 
features necessary to handle the volume and types of Federal 
court proceedings being held at this location. A lease-
construct project is an appropriate strategy in instances such 
as this in which the court space need is modest, acute, and in 
a location where an extensive Federal presence is not needed.
    Lease-construct Report.--The Committee is concerned that 
decisions regarding the provision of courthouse space for the 
judiciary are made without any consultation with the judiciary, 
particularly with respect to whether to undertake a new 
construction project or utilize a lease-construct strategy for 
acquiring space. The Committee directs the General Services 
Administration and the judiciary to develop and submit a joint 
report to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives no later than 120 days after 
enactment of this act. The report should identify the 
circumstances under which it would be appropriate to provide 
court facilities using a lease-construct strategy. The 
Committee understands that this approach may be more conducive 
to the effective delivery of justice and warranted in instances 
when the need is modest, acute, and in a location where a large 
Federal court presence is not needed.
    Use of Stairs.--The Committee commends GSA for carrying out 
an annual program that promotes the use of stairs through the 
display of appropriate signage in federally owned and leased 
buildings. This program delivers considerable health benefits 
for the Federal workforce and the general population at a very 
low cost to the Government. The Committee believes that the 
Federal Government should be a leader in encouraging workplace 
wellness, and there is mounting evidence that even small 
amounts of exercise accumulated throughout the day can provide 
significant health benefits. In addition, lessening the use of 
elevators will speed their movement for those that genuinely 
need them. The Committee supports the continued promotion of 
the use of stairs and directs GSA to display appropriate 
signage next to elevator buttons, at the entrance to 
stairwells, and at the base of escalators in federally owned 
and leased buildings.
    Promoting Energy Efficiency Through Use of Revolving 
Doors.--The Committee supports the promotion of the use of 
revolving doors over swing doors by staff, tenants, and 
visitors to Federal buildings, when possible and appropriate, 
as a significant component of energy conservation. One of the 
most common ways that outside air penetrates a building is 
through the doors. Revolving doors maintain the existing 
environment within a building because they create a seal that 
prevents outside air from flowing into a building. On average, 
eight times as much air is exchanged when a swing door is 
opened compared to a revolving door. In addition to keeping 
heat and cold in or out, revolving doors create a better inside 
environment by reducing pollution, noise, and dirt. 
Unfortunately, the use of revolving doors is not as prevalent 
as it could be, resulting in less energy efficiency within 
buildings. The Committee looks forward to receiving GSA's 
upcoming report on the actions taken and achieved to promote 
the use of revolving doors.
    Custom House in New Orleans.--The Committee is aware that 
Hurricane Katrina caused a roof collapse on one of the most 
architecturally and historically significant Government-owned 
structures in the southern United States, the U.S. Custom House 
in New Orleans, Louisiana. While renovations are being 
conducted by GSA and the Customs and Border Patrol, work has 
been proceeding slowly. The Committee is supportive of the 
project and expects that contracts will be awarded in a timely 
manner.
    Community Involvement.--The Committee is concerned that GSA 
frequently shows a lack of concern for the opinions of local 
communities when developing and planning construction projects. 
The Committee urges GSA to make every possible attempt to 
address community concerns during the development stage of all 
GSA projects. The Committee directs GSA to coordinate with the 
community leaders and stakeholders in Madawaska, Maine, to 
address concerns during the development of the new port of 
entry.
    Contracts for Design and Construction of Border Stations 
and Ports of Entry.--The Committee is aware that the 
construction of new border patrol stations and land ports of 
entry will enhance America's security and improve cross-border 
commerce. The Committee also acknowledges that these 
construction projects represent significant economic 
opportunity, particularly in rural America. Therefore, the 
Committee encourages GSA to make every effort to involve small 
businesses at all stages of design and construction of border 
stations and land ports of entry. The Committee directs GSA and 
Customs and Border Protection to limit their reliance on 
indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contracts for design 
and construction of border stations and ports of entry.

     FEDERAL BUILDINGS FUND--LIMITATIONS ON AVAILABILITY OF REVENUE

Limitation on availability of revenue:
    Limitation on availability, 2009\1\................. $13,973,771,000
    Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2010...   8,530,685,000
Committee recommendation................................   8,488,585,000

\1\Includes $5,546,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5), of which not less than 
$750,000,000 was made available for Federal Buildings and United States 
Courthouses, not less than $300,000,000 was made available for border 
stations and land ports of entry, and not less than $4,500,000,000 was 
made available for measures necessary to convert GSA facilities to High-
Performance Green Buildings, as defined in section 401 of Public Law 
110-140. This does not include $4,000,000 provided in the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act that was transferred to the Government-
wide Policy account.

    The Federal Buildings Fund program consists of the 
following activities financed from rent charges:
    Construction and Acquisition of Facilities.--Space is 
acquired through the construction or purchase of facilities and 
prospectus-level extensions to existing buildings. All costs 
directly attributable to site acquisition, construction, and 
the full range of design and construction services, and 
management and inspection of construction projects are funded 
under this activity.
    Repairs and Alterations.--Repairs and alterations of public 
buildings as well as associated design and construction 
services are funded under this activity. Protection of the 
Government's investment, health and safety of building 
occupants, transfer of agencies from leased space, and cost 
effectiveness are the principal criteria used in establishing 
priorities. Primary consideration is given to repairs to 
prevent deterioration and damage to buildings, their support 
systems, and operating equipment. This activity also provides 
for conversion of existing facilities and non-prospectus 
extensions.
    Installment Acquisition Payments.--Payments are made for 
liabilities incurred under purchase contract authority and 
lease purchase arrangements. The periodic payments cover 
principal, interest, and other requirements on the debt 
incurred for construction of Federal buildings.
    Rental of Space.--Space is acquired through the leasing of 
buildings including space occupied by Federal agencies in U.S. 
Postal Service facilities. GSA provided 177 million square feet 
of rental space in fiscal year 2008. GSA expects to provide 190 
million square feet of rental space in fiscal year 2009 and 194 
million in fiscal year 2010.
    Building Operations.--Services are provided for Government-
owned and leased facilities, including cleaning, utilities and 
fuel, maintenance, miscellaneous services (such as moving, 
evaluation of new materials and equipment, and field 
supervision), and general management and administration of all 
real property related programs including salaries and benefits 
paid from the Federal Buildings Fund.
    Other Programs.--When requested by Federal agencies, the 
Public Buildings Service provides building services, such as 
tenant alterations, cleaning and other operations, and 
protection services which are in excess of those services 
provided under the commercial rental charge. For presentation 
purposes, the balances of the Unconditional Gifts of Real, 
Personal, or Other Property Trust Fund have been combined with 
the Federal Buildings Fund.

                      CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION

Limitation on availability, 2009\1\.....................    $746,317,000
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2010.......     657,637,000
Committee recommendation................................     734,037,000

\1\Of the $5,550,000,000 provided by the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) for deposit in the Federal 
Buildings fund, not less than $750,000,000 was made available for 
Federal buildings and United States Courthouses, and not less than 
$300,000,000 was made available for border stations and land ports of 
entry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The construction and acquisition fund shall be available 
for site, design, construction, management, and inspection 
costs for the construction of new Federal facilities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $734,037,000 for 
construction and acquisition, including non-prospectus 
projects.

                      CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 State                     Description                        Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    CA Calexico, Calexico West, Land Port of Entry          $9,437,000
    CO Lakewood, Denver Federal Center Remediation           9,962,000
    DC Southeast Federal Center Remediation                 15,000,000
    FL Miami, FBI Consolidation                            190,675,000
    GA Savannah, U.S. Courthouse                             7,900,000
    ME Madawaska, Land Port of Entry                        50,127,000
    MD White Oak, FDA Consolidation                        137,871,000
    PA Pennsylvania, Lancaster, U.S. Courthouse              6,500,000
    TX El Paso, Tornillo-Guadalupe, Land Port of Entry      91,565,000
    TX San Antonio, U.S. Courthouse                          4,000,000
    UT Salt Lake City, U.S. Courthouse                     211,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        REPAIRS AND ALTERATIONS

Limitation on availability, 2009\1\.....................    $692,374,000
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2010.......     496,276,000
Committee recommendation................................     453,776,000

\1\Of the $5,550,000,000 provided by the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) for deposit in the Federal 
Buildings fund, not less than $4,500,000,000 was made available for 
measures necessary to convert GSA facilities to High-Performance Green 
Buildings, as defined in section 401 of Public Law 110-140.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Under this activity, the General Services Administration 
[GSA] executes its responsibility for repairs and alterations 
[R&A] of both Government-owned and leased facilities under the 
control of GSA. The primary goal of this activity is to provide 
commercially equivalent space to tenant agencies. Safety, 
quality, and operating efficiency of facilities are given 
primary consideration in carrying out this responsibility.
    R&A workload requirements originate with scheduled onsite 
inspections of buildings by qualified regional engineers and 
building managers. The work identified through these 
inspections is programmed in order of priority into the 
Inventory Reporting Information System and incorporated into a 
5-year plan for accomplishment, based upon funding 
availability, urgency, and the volume of R&A work that GSA has 
the capability to execute annually. Since fiscal year 1995, 
design and construction services activities associated with 
repair and alteration projects have been funded in this 
account.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends new obligational authority of 
$453,776,000 for repairs and alterations in fiscal year 2010. 
This amount is $232,098,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted 
level and $36,000,000 below the President's request. The 
Committee has included limited funding for two special emphasis 
programs, energy and water retrofit and conservation measures 
and Federal high-performance green buildings. The Committee 
strongly supports these programs and expects GSA to use funding 
made available under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 
of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) to support these programs in fiscal 
year 2010 in addition to the funding provided for fiscal year 
2010.

                         REPAIRS AND ALTERATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 State                     Description                        Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    DC East Wing Infrastructure Systems Replacement       $114,500,000
    DC Eisenhower Executive Office Building Courtyard       10,000,000
        Replacement
    DC Eisenhower Executive Office Building Roof            15,000,000
        Replacement
    DC New Executive Office Building                        30,276,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    INSTALLMENT ACQUISITION PAYMENTS

Limitation on availability, 2009........................    $149,570,000
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2010.......     140,525,000
Committee recommendation................................     140,525,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Public Buildings Amendments of 1972 enable GSA to enter 
into contractual arrangements for the construction of a backlog 
of approved but unfunded projects. This activity provides for 
the payment of interest to the Federal Financing Bank related 
to facilities acquired pursuant to the Public Buildings 
Amendments of 1972 (40 U.S.C. 592).

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $140,525,000 for 
installment acquisition payments. This amount is $9,045,000 
below the fiscal year 2009 funding level and the same as the 
budget request.

                            RENTAL OF SPACE

Limitation on availability, 2009........................  $4,642,156,000
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2010.......   4,879,871,000
Committee recommendation................................   4,829,871,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    GSA is responsible for leasing general purpose space and 
land incident thereto for Federal agencies, except in cases 
where GSA has delegated its leasing authority. GSA's policy is 
to lease privately owned buildings and land only when: (1) 
Federal space needs cannot be otherwise accommodated 
satisfactorily in existing Government-owned or leased space; 
(2) leasing proves to be more efficient than the construction 
or alteration of a Federal building; (3) construction or 
alteration is not warranted because requirements in the 
community are insufficient or are indefinite in scope or 
duration; or (4) completion of a new Federal building within a 
reasonable time cannot be assured.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $4,829,871,000 for 
rental of space. The Committee recommendation is $187,715,000 
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and is $50,000,000 
below the budget request.

                          BUILDING OPERATIONS

Limitation on availability, 2009........................  $2,197,354,000
Limitation on availability, budget estimate, 2010.......   2,356,376,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,330,376,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This activity provides for the operation of all Government-
owned facilities under the jurisdiction of GSA and building 
services in GSA-leased space where the terms of the lease do 
not require the lessor to furnish such services. Services 
included in building operations are cleaning, protection, 
maintenance, payments for utilities and fuel, grounds 
maintenance, and elevator operations. Other related supporting 
services include various real property management and staff 
support activities such as space acquisition and assignment; 
the moving of Federal agencies as a result of space alterations 
in order to provide better space utilization in existing 
buildings; onsite inspection of building services and 
operations accomplished by private contractors; and various 
highly specialized contract administration support functions.
    The space, operations, and services referred to above are 
furnished by GSA to its tenant agencies in return for payment 
of rent. Due to considerations unique to their operation, GSA 
also provides varying levels of above-standard services in 
agency headquarters facilities, including those occupied by the 
Executive Office of the President, such as the east and west 
wings of the White House.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $2,330,376,000 for 
building operations. This amount is $133,022,000 above the 
fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $26,000,000 below the budget 
request.

        ENERGY-EFFICIENT FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE FLEET PROCUREMENT

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................    $300,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

\1\Provided in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 
(Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public 
Law 111-5) provided $300,000,000 for capital expenditures and 
necessary expenses of acquiring motor vehicles with higher fuel 
economy, including hybrid vehicles, electric vehicles, and 
commercially-available plug-in hybrid vehicles. These funds are 
to remain available until September 30, 2011.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends no new funding for Energy-
Efficient Federal Motor Vehicle Fleet Procurement. This is the 
same as the budget request.

                         GOVERNMENT-WIDE POLICY

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................     $58,578,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      65,165,000
Committee recommendation................................      61,165,000

\1\Includes $4,000,000 by transfer as provided in the American Recovery 
and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Government-wide Policy provides for 
Government-wide policy development, support, and evaluation 
functions associated with real and personal property, supplies, 
vehicles, aircraft, information technology, acquisition, 
transportation, and travel management. This office also 
provides for the Federal Procurement Data Center, Workplace 
Initiatives, Regulatory Information Service Center, the Catalog 
of Federal Domestic Assistance, and the Committee Management 
Secretariat. The Office of Government-wide Policy, working 
cooperatively with other agencies, provides the leadership 
needed to develop and evaluate the implementation of policies 
designed to achieve the most cost-effective solutions for the 
delivery of administrative services and sound workplace 
practices, while reducing regulations and empowering employees.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $61,165,000 
for Government-wide Policy. This amount is $2,587,000 above the 
fiscal year 2009 enacted level, which included funds 
transferred by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 
2009 (Public Law 111-5) and $4,000,000 below the budget 
request.
    High-performance Green Buildings.--The Committee notes that 
the budget requests that $4,000,000 be provided for the Office 
of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings to support a 
staffing level of 9 full-time equivalents [FTEs]. The budget 
request indicates that the request is a continuation of funding 
provided in the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 
[ARRA] (Public Law 111-5). ARRA provided $4,000,000 to be 
transferred to the Government-wide Policy account for the 
Office of Green Buildings, as authorized in the Energy 
Independence and Security Act of 2007 [EISA] (Public Law 110-
140). These funds are available for obligation through fiscal 
year 2010.
    The Committee is extremely disappointed that GSA has, to 
date, failed to obligate any of the funds provided in ARRA for 
the Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings. The 
Committee reminds GSA that ARRA provided over $12,000,000,000 
across Government for investments in Federal buildings and 
Federal facilities. Many of these appropriations provide funds 
for investments in energy efficiency, energy-efficient 
retrofits to existing facilities, or energy projects. Funding 
for the Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings was 
included in ARRA with the expectation that the Federal director 
would assist all Federal agencies in using these funds to 
implement improved green building standards. The Committee is 
dismayed that GSA appears to have taken no actions in this 
regard.
    In light of GSA's critical responsibilities under EISA and 
ARRA, the Committee directs GSA to use the $4,000,000 provided 
in ARRA to fully establish and stand up the Office of Federal 
High-Performance Green Buildings, including hiring the 
requested nine FTEs as soon as possible and then immediately 
begin fulfilling its responsibilities. The Committee directs 
GSA to submit to the Committees on Appropriations a detailed 
expenditure plan for this Office within 30 days of enactment of 
this act. The plan should describe the budget, timeline, 
objectives, and benefits of the Office and its projects. The 
Committee further directs GSA to report to the Committee on the 
obligation of these funds on a monthly basis.

                           OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $70,645,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      71,881,000
Committee recommendation................................      71,881,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Operating Expenses provides for the salaries and expenses 
of Government-wide activities associated with utilization and 
donation of surplus personal property and disposal of real 
property; agency-wide policy direction, management, and 
communications; the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals; and 
services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $71,881,000 
for Operating Expenses. This amount is $1,236,000 above the 
fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget 
request.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................     $61,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      60,080,000
Committee recommendation................................      58,000,000

\1\Includes $7,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation provides agency-wide audit and 
investigative functions to identify and correct management and 
administrative deficiencies within the General Services 
Administration [GSA], including conditions for existing or 
potential instances of fraud, waste, and mismanagement. This 
audit function provides internal audit and contract audit 
services. Contract audits provide professional advice to GSA 
contracting officials on accounting and financial matters 
relative to the negotiation, award, administration, repricing, 
and settlement of contracts. Internal audits review and 
evaluate all facets of GSA operations and programs, test 
internal control systems, and develop information to improve 
operating efficiencies and enhance customer services. The 
investigative function provides for the detection and 
investigation of improper and illegal activities involving GSA 
programs, personnel, and operations.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $58,000,000 
for the Office of Inspector General. This amount is $3,000,000 
below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $2,080,000 below 
the budget request.

                   ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT [E-GOV] FUND

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     $33,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      35,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This program supports interagency ``electronic government'' 
or ``e-gov'' initiatives, i.e., projects that use the Internet 
or other electronic methods to provide individuals, businesses, 
and government agencies with simpler and more timely access to 
Federal information, benefits, services, and business 
opportunities.
    Proposals for funding of e-gov initiatives must meet 
capital planning guidelines and include adequate documentation 
to demonstrate a sound business case, attention to security and 
privacy, and a mechanism to measure performance against planned 
results. In addition, a small portion of the funds may be used 
for awards to project management teams that delivered the best 
product to meet customer needs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,000,000 
for the Electronic Government Fund. This amount is $35,000,000 
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $2,000,000 above 
the budget request.
    The Committee strongly supports the activities of the 
Federal CIO Council related to ``cloud computing'' and 
encourages the council to continue to assess and address the 
escalating costs, inefficiencies, and stove-piping related to 
the management of Federal data. The Committee has included 
$35,000,000 for electronic government activities related to 
Cloud Computing Infrastructure Pilots and Collaboration, 
$2,000,000 above the President's request. This amount includes 
$15,000,000 for improving innovation, efficiency and 
effectiveness in Federal IT, including an initiative on 
optimizing common services and solutions/cloud-computing. This 
initiative would provide for pilots to identify enterprise-wide 
common solutions to eliminate duplication at the agency level 
and lower the total cost of Federal IT infrastructure. Of this 
$15,000,000, the Committee is including $7,500,000 for the 
Center for IT Excellence proposed by GSA. The center will 
deploy a selected set of infrastructure services, cloud based 
applications, offer Infrastructure as a service to agencies, 
and provide portal government applications.
    The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for USASpending.gov for 
implementation of the Federal Funding Accountability and 
Transparency Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-282). At 
USASpending.gov, citizens will be able to see how, when, with 
whom, and on what the Government is spending taxpayer funds, 
and whether or not that money is delivering results.
    The Committee recommends $7,000,000 for Efficient Federal 
Workforce activities, an initiative that will provide a 
significant expansion of technologies for file sharing and 
access management, and investment in a system that spans across 
all agencies, rather than relying on agency-centric systems. 
The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for participation and 
collaboration, including, harnessing new technologies, an 
initiative for the development and deployment of Web 2.0 
technologies in a way that would encourage citizen 
participation and collaboration.
    Finally, $3,000,000 is recommended for Data.gov, an online 
repository that allows the public to easily find, download, and 
use publicly available data sets that are generated and held by 
the Federal Government.
    The Committee urges GSA to administer this funding in joint 
consultation with the Office of Management and Budget. The 
Committee expects GSA to use funds for infrastructure pilots 
primarily on infrastructure migration activities related to 
consolidation, standardization, and optimization. This will 
allow GSA to identify enterprise-wide common solutions that 
have the potential to eliminate duplication and lower the total 
cost of Federal information technology infrastructure. To 
increase efficiencies, the Committee urges GSA to use the funds 
provided for the Center of IT Excellence to further examine the 
use of secure virtualized data centers by co-locating the 
Center at an existing multi-tenant, Government Owned/Government 
Operated [GOGO] data facility.

           ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $2,934,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       3,756,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,756,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation provides for an annual pension and 
compensation for office staffs and other related operating 
expenses for each former President pursuant to Public Law 85-
745. The cost of franking privileges for the widows of former 
President Reagan and former President Ford are also funded in 
this appropriation.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $3,756,000 for allowances and 
office staff for former Presidents, $822,000 above the fiscal 
year 2009 funding level and the same as the budget request.
    Below is listed a detailed analysis of the Committee's 
recommendation for fiscal year 2010 funding:

                    FISCAL YEAR 2010 BUDGET ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Carter   G.H. Bush   Clinton   G.W. Bush    Widows     Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personnel Compensation........................         96         96         96        150  .........        438
Personnel Benefits............................          2         64         70        102  .........        238
Benefits for Former Presidents................        199        199        210        210  .........        818
Travel........................................          2         56          5         80  .........        143
Rental Payments to GSA........................        102        175        579        345  .........      1,201
Communications, Utilities, and Miscellaneous
 Charges:
    Telephone.................................         10         17          7         85  .........        119
    Postage...................................         15         13         14         20         14         76
Printing......................................          5         14         18         26  .........         63
Other Services................................         75        112         51        162  .........        400
Supplies & Materials..........................          5         15          2         40  .........         62
Equipment.....................................          7         69         36         86  .........        198
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total Obligations.......................        518        830      1,088      1,306         14      3,756
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    PRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $8,520,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    This appropriation provides for an orderly transfer of 
executive leadership, in accordance with the Presidential 
Transition Act of 1963. Funds are only requested during a 
Presidential election year and are not available for obligation 
by the incumbent administration. The Committee is therefore not 
recommending funding for fiscal year 2010.

                     FEDERAL CITIZEN SERVICES FUND

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $36,096,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      36,515,000
Committee recommendation................................      36,515,000

                          program description

    The Federal Citizen Services Fund [FCSF] (formerly the 
Federal Citizen Information Center) appropriation provides for 
the salaries and expenses of the Office of Citizen Services 
[OCS]. The FCSF consolidates all of GSA's citizen-oriented 
programs into a single funding source by unifying OCS programs 
formerly funded by the Federal Citizen Information Center Fund 
and the Operating Expenses appropriations. The Office of 
Citizen Services provides citizens, businesses, other 
governments, and the media with access points to easily obtain 
Government information and services via the Internet, e-mail, 
print, and telephone.
    The OCS provides information and services to the public 
primarily through USA.gov and GobiernoUSA.gov, the official web 
portals of the U.S. Government. OCS also operates 
pueblo.gsa.gov, consumeraction.gov and consumidor.gov, 
webcontent.gov, and kids.gov websites. OCS provides direct 
telephone (1-800-FED-INFO), e-mail and online assistance to 
citizens through the National Contact Center, and offers simple 
and cost-effective contact center solutions to customer Federal 
agencies through the USA Services program. OCS also coordinates 
the publication and distribution of information through the 
Government Printing Office's Public Documents Distribution 
Center in Pueblo, Colorado.
    OCS supports effective Government by training web and 
contact center managers across the Federal Government through 
Web Manager University, and provides administrative support to 
various interagency steering committees. OCS provides 
management of the USA.gov hosting infrastructure, including 
support for all Federal agency applications on USA.gov, and 
provides development and facilitation services to Federal 
agencies and initiatives to enhance their delivery of citizen 
services. OCS brings Federal, State, territorial, local and 
Indian tribal governments together to improve services to 
citizens through sharing of best practices, and serves as a 
point of contact to other nations to share experiences in 
delivering citizen services and to bring new solutions to the 
U.S. Government.
    The FCSF is financed through annual appropriations to pay 
for the salaries and expenses of OCS staff. Reimbursements from 
Federal agencies pay for the direct costs of information 
services OCS provides on their behalf. The FCSF also receives 
funding from user fees for publications ordered by the public, 
payments from private entities for services rendered, and gifts 
from the public. All income is available without regard to 
fiscal year limitations, but is subject to an annual aggregate 
expenditure limit as set forth in appropriation acts.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $36,515,000 for the Federal 
Services Center, an increase of $419,000 above the fiscal year 
2009 enacted level and the same as the budget request.
    The appropriation will be augmented by reimbursements from 
Federal agencies for distribution of consumer publications, 
user fees from the public, and other income.

       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

    Section 510 authorizes GSA to use funds for the hire of 
passenger motor vehicles.
    Section 511 authorizes GSA to transfer funds within the 
Federal buildings fund for meeting program requirements.
    Section 512 requires that the fiscal year 2011 budget 
request meet certain standards.
    Section 513 provides that no funds may be used to increase 
the amount of occupiable square feet, provide cleaning 
services, security enhancements, or any other service usually 
provided, to any agency which does not pay the requested rate.
    Section 514 continues the provision that permits GSA to pay 
small claims less than $250,000 made against the Government.
    Section 515 provides that certain lease agreements must 
conform to an approved prospectus.
    Section 516 authorizes GSA to allow volunteer and other 
nongovernmental organizations supporting the National Response 
Framework, under Emergency Support Function [ESF] #6--Mass 
Care, Housing, and Human Services, access to GSA Sources of 
Supply.

                 Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................        $500,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................         660,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation is an independent 
agency established by Congress in 1975 (Public Law 93-642) to 
encourage exceptional college students to pursue careers in 
public service through the Truman Scholarship program. The 
Truman Scholarship is a merit-based award available to college 
juniors who plan to pursue careers in Government or elsewhere 
in public service. Truman Scholars receive up to $30,000 for 
graduate or professional school, participate in leadership 
development activities, and have special opportunities for 
internships and employment with the Federal Government.
    The Foundation Trust Fund was established with a one-time 
$30,000 appropriation in 1976. The authorizing legislation 
directed that this endowment be invested solely in U.S. 
Treasury Securities, the interest from which has funded the 
Foundation's operating budget. With the decline in interest 
rates, the Foundation has experienced a significant decline in 
Federal financial support. From fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year 
2009, despite having cut expenditures by 27 percent, annual 
trust fund revenue has declined 33 percent. The Foundation 
anticipates a budget deficit of $500,000 for fiscal year 2010 
if appropriations are not provided.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $660,000 for 
the Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation. This amount is 
$160,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $660,000 
above the budget request. The appropriation is provided to 
offset the decline in trust fund revenues, to increase direct 
financial support to scholars, to ensure compliance with 
government audit reporting requirements, and to invest in 
technology and financial development activities.

                     Merit Systems Protection Board


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $38,811,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      40,339,000
Committee recommendation................................      40,339,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Merit Systems Protection Board [MSPB] was established 
by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. MSPB is an independent 
quasi-judicial agency manifested to protect Federal merit 
systems against partisan political and other prohibited 
personnel practices and to ensure adequate protection for 
employees against abuses by agency management.
    MSPB assists Federal agencies in running a merit-based 
civil service system. This is accomplished on a case-by-case 
basis through hearing and deciding employee appeals and on a 
systemic basis by reviewing significant actions and regulations 
of the Office of Personnel Management [OPM] and conducting 
studies of the civil service and other merit systems. The 
intended results of MSPB's efforts are to assure that personnel 
actions taken against employees are processed within the law 
and that actions taken by OPM and other agencies support and 
enhance Federal merit principles.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,339,000 
for the Merit Systems Protection Board. This is an increase of 
$1,528,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the 
same as the budget request. The Committee makes available not 
more than $2,579,000 for adjudicating retirement appeals 
through an appropriation from the trust fund consistent with 
past practice.

 Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental 
                           Policy Foundation


 MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXCELLENCE IN NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL 
                           POLICY FOUNDATION

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $3,750,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       2,200,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,850,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The General Fund payment to the Morris K. Udall Fund is 
invested in Treasury securities with maturities suitable to the 
needs of the Fund. Interest earnings from the investments are 
used to carry out the activities of the Morris K. Udall 
Foundation. The Foundation awards scholarships, fellowships, 
and grants, and funds activities of the Udall Center.
    The Morris K. Udall Foundation also supports training 
programs for professionals in health care policy and public 
policy, such as the Native Nations Institute [NNI]. NNI, based 
at the University of Arizona, provides Native Americans with 
leadership and management training, and analyzes policies 
relevant to tribes.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,850,000 for 
the Morris K. Udall Foundation. This amount is $100,000 above 
the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and $1,650,000 above the 
budget request. The Committee includes language to allow up to 
60 percent of the appropriation to be used for the expenses of 
the Native Nations Institute.

                 ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION FUND

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $2,100,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       3,800,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution is 
a Federal program established by Public Law 105-156 to assist 
parties in resolving environmental, natural resource, and 
public lands conflicts. The Institute is part of the Morris K. 
Udall Foundation and serves as an impartial, non-partisan 
institution providing professional expertise, services, and 
resources to all parties involved in such disputes. The 
Institute helps parties determine whether collaborative problem 
solving is appropriate for specific environmental conflicts, 
how and when to bring all the parties together for discussion, 
and whether a third-party facilitator or mediator might be 
helpful in assisting the parties in their efforts to reach 
consensus or to resolve the conflict. In addition, the 
Institute maintains a roster of qualified facilitators and 
mediators with substantial experience in environmental conflict 
resolution and can help parties in selecting an appropriate 
neutral professional.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,000,000 for 
the Morris K. Udall Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund. This 
amount is $900,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and 
$800,000 below the budget request.

              National Archives and Records Administration

    The National Archives and Records Administration [NARA] is 
the national recordkeeper, managing the Government's archives 
and records, and operating the Presidential libraries. NARA is 
an independent agency created by statute in 1934 and tasked 
with the unique mission to identify, access, protect, preserve, 
and make available for use the important documents and records 
of all three branches of the Federal Government. NARA 
administers the Information Security Oversight Office, is the 
publisher of the Federal Register, and makes grants for 
historical documentation through the National Historical 
Publications and Records Commission [NHPRC]. In addition, NARA 
is charged with additional responsibilities including mediating 
Freedom of Information Act disputes and coordinating controlled 
unclassified information.

                           OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $330,308,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     339,770,000
Committee recommendation................................     339,770,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides for basic operations dealing with 
management of the Federal Government's archives and records, 
operation of Presidential libraries, review for 
declassification of classified security information, and other 
duties.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $339,770,000 for operating 
expenses of the National Archives and Records Administration 
for fiscal year 2010. This amount is $9,462,000 above the 
fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget 
request.
    The Committee's recommendation includes requested funds to 
implement the Controlled Unclassified Information [CUI] Office 
to oversee the CUI framework, operate the Office of Government 
Information Services to support accessibility to records under 
the Freedom of Information Act, expand the archival staff by 12 
FTE to build a cadre of new technology savvy archivists to 
handle the influx of new records which need to be processed, 
preserved and stored, and store newly accessioned civilian 
official personnel files transferred to NARA's custody.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................................
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      $4,100,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,100,000

\1\Appropriations for the Office of the Inspector General were included 
within the Operating Expenses appropriation in fiscal year 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The mission of the Office of Inspector General [OIG] is to 
ensure that NARA safeguards and preserves the records of our 
Government while providing the American people with access to 
the essential documentation of their rights and the actions of 
their Government. The OIG accomplishes this by combating fraud, 
waste, and abuse through high-quality objective audits and 
investigations covering all aspects of agency operations at 44 
facilities nationwide. The OIG also serves as an independent, 
internal advocate for the economy, efficiency, and 
effectiveness of NARA and its operations.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee provides $4,100,000 for the Office of 
Inspector General [OIG] as a new separate appropriation, the 
same as the budget request. In previous fiscal years, 
appropriations for the OIG were a component of the Operating 
Expenses appropriation. The Committee supports a distinct 
account for the OIG in order to clearly identify the resources 
necessary to staff and operate the expanding mission-critical 
oversight and accountability functions performed by the OIG to 
ensure responsible NARA stewardship over records. The Committee 
acknowledges that as the missions of NARA expand, including the 
establishment of the George W. Bush Presidential Library, the 
implementation of the Office Government Information Services, 
and the start-up of the Controlled Unclassified Information 
Office, the OIG's audit and investigative responsibilities 
grow. The Committee supports the increase above the fiscal year 
2009 funding to support the hiring of two criminal 
investigators and one program auditor in the OIG.

                      ELECTRONIC RECORDS ARCHIVES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $67,008,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      85,500,000
Committee recommendation................................      85,500,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Since 2001, NARA has been developing an Electronic Records 
Archives [ERA] that will permit management of records 
electronically and ensure the preservation of and access to 
Government electronic records. With the rapid changes in 
technology today, the formats in which records are stored 
become obsolete within a few years, making records inaccessible 
even if they are preserved intact with the most modern 
technology. ERA will preserve electronic records generated in a 
manner that enables requesters to access them on computer 
systems now and in the future. ERA will include a base system 
for Federal records and a separate system for Presidential 
records.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $85,500,000 for the ERA project. 
This amount is an increase of $18,492,000 above the fiscal year 
2009 enacted level and the same as the budget request. The 
Committee provides additional resources as requested in the 
budget to support the deployment of public access and initial 
preservation capabilities developed during 2009. The bill 
includes a provision requiring NARA to submit a spending plan 
for these funds.
    The Committee expects that the expenditure plan submitted 
for fiscal year 2010 shall specifically identify and explain 
the outcomes that NARA expects from the funding made available, 
particularly the extent to which completed system increments 
include all or only partial planned functionality.
    The Committee strongly supports the ERA program at NARA and 
is committed to working to ensure that this program is 
adequately funded on an expedited basis so ERA can preserve the 
Nation's important records at the earliest feasible date.
    The Committee is highly concerned about the lack of 
progress in developing ERA capabilities to ingest electronic 
records from the previous Presidential administration. The 
Committee is aware that NARA certified initial operating 
capability for the Executive Office of the President [EOP] 
System in December 2008. However, a recent review by the 
Government Accountability Office [GAO] determined that less 
than 3 percent of the electronic records from the Bush 
administration had been ingested into the system at the time of 
the review and that NARA did not expect the remainder to be 
ingested until October 2009.
    The Committee is concerned that until NARA completely and 
accurately ingests the Bush administration Presidential records 
into the EOP system, it will be unable to use the system for 
its intended purpose. Furthermore, NARA will incur additional 
costs maintaining the systems it is now using to support 
requests for these records. The Committee urges NARA to place a 
high priority on addressing the delay in ingesting records. The 
Committee directs NARA to report to Congress no later than 
December 31, 2009 on the status of the Bush administration 
records ingestion project.
    The Committee is also concerned that NARA lacks a 
contingency plan for the ERA system in the event of a failure 
or disruption, and a fully functional backup and restore 
process for ERA, a key component for ensuring system 
availability. The Committee directs that the funding provided 
be devoted to establish a robust online backup and restoration 
service and ensure that adequate capabilities are in place for 
managing restricted information.
    The Committee notes that in March 2009, NARA officials 
became aware that an external hard drive containing copies of 
Clinton administration EOP data was missing from one of its 
facilities. The Committee recognizes that the sheer volume of 
archived materials, combined with a limited operating budget, 
means that such losses may occur. However, the loss of any 
information, particularly classified materials or personally 
identifiable information, should be considered a serious matter 
and NARA should take steps to promptly notify those individuals 
affected and the congressional committees of jurisdiction. The 
Committee is very concerned that NARA did not timely inform the 
Committee of the loss of this material. The Committee directs 
NARA to inform all relevant committees of jurisdiction of any 
such data breaches within 24 hours of when a data breach has 
been discovered.

                        REPAIRS AND RESTORATION

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $50,711,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      27,500,000
Committee recommendation................................      27,500,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides for the repair, alteration, and 
improvement of Archives facilities and Presidential libraries 
nationwide, and provides adequate storage for holdings. It will 
better enable NARA to maintain its facilities in proper 
condition for public visitors, researchers, and NARA employees, 
and also maintain the structural integrity of the buildings.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $27,500,000 for the repairs and 
restoration account. This amount is $23,211,000 below the 
fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget 
request.
    The Committee is aware of the great need of repairs of 
Presidential libraries, particularly the FDR Presidential 
Library, which suffers from flooding, whose infrastructure is 
dangerously deteriorated and outdated, and whose systems 
violate NARA's standards for preservation.
    The Committee is pleased to support the request, which 
includes $17,500,000 to complete the renovation of the FDR 
Presidential Library, the oldest in the Presidential library 
system. This funding will ensure that this facility meets 
modern standards and that the records of President Roosevelt 
are housed in appropriate space. The Committee is particularly 
encouraged that the budget request reflects the highest 
priority needs in the capital improvement plan. The Committee 
expects the remaining $10,000,000 to be used to fund repairs 
and restorations to 16 NARA-owned facilities.
    The Committee appreciates NARA's submission of an update of 
its comprehensive capital needs assessment for its entire 
infrastructure of Presidential libraries and records 
facilities, as part of the fiscal year 2010 budget submission 
and urges NARA to include an appropriate level of funding for 
repair of valuable historic Presidential libraries in the 
fiscal year 2011 budget request.

        NATIONAL HISTORICAL PUBLICATIONS AND RECORDS COMMISSION

                             GRANTS PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $11,250,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      12,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The National Historical Publications and Records Commission 
[NHPRC] provides grants nationwide to preserve and publish 
records that document American history. Administered within the 
National Archives, which preserves Federal records, NHPRC helps 
State, local, and private institutions preserve non-Federal 
records, helps publish the papers of major figures in American 
history, and helps archivists and records managers improve 
their techniques, training, and ability to serve a range of 
information users.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $12,000,000 for the National 
Historical Publications and Records Commission [NHPRC]. This 
amount is $750,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and 
$2,000,000 above the budget request. As requested, the 
Committee does not include a transfer of funds to the Operating 
Expenses account for administrative support in fiscal year 
2010, as such support for staff costs will be provided through 
the base ``Operating Expenses'' account. The Committee notes 
that this will enable more of the funds to be available for 
grants than in previous fiscal years.
    The Committee strongly supports the NHPRC program and has 
provided funding to continue this important program. This 
program has played a central role in the preservation and 
dissemination of the Nation's documentary heritage and has been 
successful in leveraging private sector contributions.
    The Committee notes that the funding provided will enable 
NARA, through the NHPRC, to undertake a variety of initiatives, 
including (1) accelerating the Founding Fathers Online project 
to provide online access to the pre-publication transcriptions 
of the papers of the Founding Fathers without charge; (2) 
publishing historical papers of key figures and movements in 
our Nation's history; and (3) advancing archives preservation, 
access, and digitization projects within the interlocking 
repositories of historic records and hidden collections. The 
Committee directs that of the total funds made available, not 
less than $3,000,000 be designated for each of these three 
efforts. The Committee further notes the creation of two new 
grant programs in the Presidential Historical Records 
Preservation Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-404), including grants 
for Presidential centers of historical excellence and grants to 
preserve records of servitude, emancipation, and post-Civil War 
Reconstruction. The Committee appreciates the competing demands 
for scarce resources, and provides an additional $2,000,000 
above the request to address the additional responsibilities. 
The Committee expects that up to $1,000,000 of the funds 
provided be devoted to each of the two new grant programs under 
Public Law 110-404. The Committee urges NARA to consult with 
the members of the NHPRC in formulating prioritization of 
resources.

                  National Credit Union Administration


                       central liquidity facility


                          program description

    The National Credit Union Administration [NCUA] Central 
Liquidity Facility [CLF] was created by the National Credit 
Union Central Liquidity Facility Act (Public Law 95-630). The 
CLF is a mixed-ownership Government corporation managed by the 
National Credit Union Administration Board and owned by its 
member credit unions.
    The purpose of the CLF is to improve the general financial 
stability of credit unions by meeting their seasonal and 
emergency liquidity needs and thereby encourage savings, 
support consumer and mortgage lending, and provide basic 
financial resources to all segments of the economy. To become 
eligible for CLF services, credit unions invest in the capital 
stock of the CLF, and the facility uses the proceeds of such 
investments and the proceeds of borrowed funds to meet the 
liquidity needs of credit unions. The primary sources of funds 
for the CLF are stock subscriptions from credit unions and 
borrowings.
    The CLF may borrow funds from any source, with the amount 
of borrowing limited to 12 times the amount of subscribed 
capital stock and surplus.
    Loans are available to meet short-term requirements for 
funds attributable to emergency outflows from managerial 
difficulties or local economic downturns. Seasonal credit is 
also provided to accommodate fluctuations caused by cyclical 
changes in such areas as agriculture, education, and retail 
business. Loans can also be made to offset protracted credit 
problems caused by factors such as regional economic decline.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends that lending through the CLF be 
limited to the maximum level provided for by section 
307(a)(4)(A) of the Federal Credit Union Act. This limitation 
provides the NCUA maximum flexibility to assist with credit 
unions' financial liquidity during the economic downturn. The 
Committee also recommends the budget request of limiting 
administrative expenses for the CLF to $1,250,000 in fiscal 
year 2010.

               COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVOLVING LOAN FUND

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Community Development Revolving Loan Fund Program 
[CDRLF] was established in 1979 to assist officially designated 
``low-income'' credit unions in providing basic financial 
services to low-income communities. Low-interest loans and 
deposits are made available to assist these credit unions. 
Loans or deposits are normally repaid in 5 years, although 
shorter repayment periods may be considered. Technical 
assistance grants [TAGs] are also available to low-income 
credit unions for improving operations as well as addressing 
safety and soundness issues. Credit unions use TAG funds for 
specific initiatives, including taxpayer assistance, financial 
education, home ownership initiatives, and training assistance.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for technical 
assistance grants to community development credit unions. This 
funding level is equal to the budget request and the fiscal 
year 2009 enacted level. The Committee expects the CDRLF to 
continue making loans from available funds derived from repaid 
loans and interest earned on previous loans to designated 
credit unions.
    The Committee supports NCUA's outreach efforts to 
underserved rural and urban communities across America through 
technical assistance grants provided within CDRLF. The 
Committee encourages NCUA to continue its efforts to provide 
financial education, particularly regarding consumer credit and 
home mortgages, and to provide alternatives to predatory 
lending services through targeted technical assistance grants 
and support.

                      Office of Government Ethics


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $13,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      13,665,000
Committee recommendation................................      13,665,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Government Ethics [OGE], a separate agency 
within the executive branch, was established by the Ethics in 
Government Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-521). OGE is charged by 
law to provide overall direction of executive branch policies 
designed to prevent conflicts of interest and ensure high 
ethical standards. OGE carries out these responsibilities by 
developing regulations pertaining to conflicts of interest, 
postemployment restrictions, standards of conduct, and public 
and confidential financial disclosure in the executive branch; 
by monitoring compliance with financial disclosure requirements 
by recommending appropriate corrective action when necessary; 
by evaluating the effectiveness of applicable laws; and by 
preparing advisory opinions and policy memoranda interpreting 
requirements regarding conflicts of interest, post employment 
restrictions, standards of conduct, and financial disclosure.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,665,000 
for salaries and expenses of the Office of Government Ethics in 
fiscal year 2010. This amount is $665,000 above the fiscal year 
2009 enacted level and the same as the budget request. The 
Committee encourages OGE to keep the Committee regularly 
informed of any emerging needs resulting from enactment of any 
new legislation affecting ethics obligations of executive 
branch officials and employees, as well as initiatives 
undertaken to fulfill OGE's critical role in Presidential 
transition issues, including education on post-employment 
restrictions for outgoing officials and processing the public 
financial disclosure reports filed by the Presidential nominees 
for high-level positions requiring Senate confirmation. The 
funding level will also allow OGE to provide the necessary 
training and guidance to equip both new and experienced ethics 
officials to handle ethics issues within their agencies.

                     Office of Personnel Management


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $92,829,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      94,970,000
Committee recommendation................................      94,970,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Personnel Management [OPM] was established by 
Public Law 95-454, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, 
enacted on October 13, 1978. OPM is responsible for management 
of Federal human resources policy and oversight of the merit 
civil service system. Although individual agencies are 
increasingly responsible for personnel operations, OPM provides 
a Government-wide policy framework for personnel matters, 
advises and assists agencies (often on a reimbursable basis), 
and ensures that agency operations are consistent with 
requirements of law on issues such as veterans preference. OPM 
oversees examining of applicants for employment, issues 
regulations and policies on hiring, classification and pay, 
training, investigations, other aspects of personnel 
management, and operates a reimbursable training program for 
the Federal Government's managers and executives. OPM is also 
responsible for administering the retirement, health benefits, 
and life insurance programs affecting most Federal employees, 
retired Federal employees, and their survivors.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a general fund appropriation of 
$94,970,000 for the salaries and expenses of the Office of 
Personnel Management. This amount is $2,141,000 above the 
fiscal year 2009 level and the same as the budget request.
    The recommendation includes $5,908,000 for the Enterprise 
Human Resources Integration project and $1,364,000 for the 
Human Resources Line of Business project.
    Retirement Systems Modernization.--The Committee is 
appreciative of the new Director's intention to make retirement 
systems modernization a top priority for OPM. In its April 2009 
report, GAO recommended that OPM provide immediate attention to 
ensure that six actions are taken. The Committee is encouraged 
that OPM agrees with the six recommendations outlined in the 
GAO report and has begun to address them. The Committee is 
providing additional funds for fiscal year 2010 to allow OPM to 
begin taking the critical, foundational steps necessary to 
ensure success for this program. Getting this program back on 
track with appropriate management leadership, controls, 
oversight, and with the goal of ensuring accurate and timely 
computation of annual annuities for all Federal retirees, is a 
high priority.
    Disability Policy and Leadership.--OPM, as the personnel 
agency for the Federal Government, should be committed to 
helping the Federal Government become the model employer 
Congress and the law mandate that it be, with regard to 
individuals with disabilities. The Committee commends OPM on 
its outreach to Federal agencies, stakeholders, and job seekers 
regarding the Schedule A appointing authority. The Committee 
believes, however, that greater use could be made of the 
Internet in communicating the Federal Government's policies 
regarding employing persons with disabilities. The Committee 
believes that the USAJOBS electronic employment portal could be 
made more user-friendly for those seeking information and 
applicants who wish to be considered under Schedule A 
authority. Including direct links to clearly written 
explanations of the Schedule A authority and including this 
topic in presentations of frequently asked questions would 
greatly improve the value of the website. The Committee directs 
OPM to work expeditiously to improve the USAJOBS site to make 
information about Schedule A authority more readily accessible 
and to report to the Committee of specific actions taken. The 
report should be submitted not later than 120 days after 
enactment.
    Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program and 
Nursing Shortage.--The Committee is concerned with the ongoing 
shortage of nurses, which is due in large part to the national 
shortage of nurse faculty, and encourages OPM to assist in 
alleviating the shortage through the Intergovernmental 
Personnel Act Mobility Program. This program provides for the 
temporary assignment of personnel between the Federal 
Government and State and local governments, colleges and 
universities, and other eligible entities. Federally employed 
nurses could be given the opportunity to serve a temporary 
assignment in an accredited school of nursing. The U.S. Bureau 
of Labor Statistics projects that more than 1 million new and 
replacement registered nurses will be needed by 2016. However, 
schools of nursing are forced to turn away thousands of 
qualified applicants each year due to faculty shortages. The 
Federal Government currently employs more than 53,000 nurses 
domestically, and many have the educational background and 
expertise to teach the next generation of nurses, in the 
process gaining valuable experience and informing students 
about careers in government service.
    The Committee directs OPM to carry out the 
Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program with special 
attention provided to Federal agencies employing more than 
2,000 nurses. OPM may develop guidelines that provide Federal 
agencies direction or guidance in using their authority under 
the Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program--
  --to provide financial assistance to Federal employees 
        holding a degree in nursing to accept an assignment to 
        teach in an accredited school of nursing in exchange 
        for a commitment from the individual to serve for an 
        additional term in Federal service or a commitment from 
        the school of nursing to take additional steps to 
        increase its number of nursing students that will 
        commit to Federal service upon graduation; and
  --to provide financial or other assistance to Federal 
        employees who have served as a nurse in the Federal 
        Government, are eligible for retirement, and are 
        qualified to teach to expedite the transition of such 
        individuals into nurse faculty positions.
    The Committee is mindful of the challenges the Federal 
Government faces in recruitment efforts to attract and retain 
talented nurses. OPM should work with the Committee to 
determine the best approach to assigning Government-employed 
nurses to public and private universities and ways to encourage 
accredited schools of nursing to promote nursing careers in 
Federal agencies.
    Employment for the Blind.--The Committee applauds the 
administration's commitment to programs which support disabled 
Americans to become fully employed and integrated into their 
communities. The Committee looks forward to receiving and 
considering the previously requested report on this matter, 
including the views of the Federal employee labor 
organizations.

                               limitation


                       (TRANSFER OF TRUST FUNDS)

Limitation, 2009........................................    $118,082,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     113,238,000
Committee recommendation................................     112,738,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    These funds will be transferred from the appropriate trust 
funds of the Office of Personnel Management to cover 
administrative expenses for the retirement and insurance 
programs, including the cost of automating the retirement 
recordkeeping systems.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation of $112,738,000, 
which is $5,344,000 less than the fiscal year 2009 level and 
$500,000 less than the budget request. The amount includes not 
more than $4,000,000 for retirement systems modernization.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $1,828,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       2,136,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,136,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Inspector General is charged with 
establishing policies for conducting and coordinating efforts 
which promote economy, efficiency, and integrity in the Office 
of Personnel Management's activities which prevent and detect 
fraud, waste, and mismanagement in the agency's programs. 
Contract audits provide professional advice to agency 
contracting officials on accounting and financial matters 
regarding the negotiation, award, administration, repricing, 
and settlement of contracts. Internal agency audits review and 
evaluate all facets of agency operations, including financial 
statements. Evaluation and inspection services provide detailed 
technical evaluations of agency operations. Insurance audits 
review the operations of health and life insurance carriers, 
healthcare providers, and insurance subscribers. The 
investigative function provides for the detection and 
investigation of improper and illegal activities involving 
programs, personnel, and operations. Administrative sanctions 
debar from participation in the health insurance program those 
healthcare providers whose conduct may pose a threat to the 
financial integrity of the program itself or to the well-being 
of insurance program enrollees.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,136,000 for 
salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General in 
fiscal year 2010. This amount is $308,000 more than the fiscal 
year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget request.

               (LIMITATION ON TRANSFER FROM TRUST FUNDS)

Limitation, 2009........................................     $18,755,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      20,428,000
Committee recommendation................................      20,428,000

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a limitation on transfers from the 
trust funds in support of the Office of Inspector General 
activities totaling $20,428,000 for fiscal year 2009. This 
amount is $1,673,000 more than the fiscal year 2009 enacted 
level, and the same as the budget request.

      government payment for annuitants, employees health benefits

Appropriations, 2009....................................  $9,533,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   9,814,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   9,814,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation covers the Government's share of the 
cost of health insurance for annuitants covered by the Federal 
Employees Health Benefits Program and the Retired Federal 
Employees Health Benefits Act of 1960, as well as 
administrative expenses incurred by OPM for these programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a mandatory appropriation of 
$9,814,000,000 for Government payments for annuitants, 
employees health benefits.

       government payment for annuitants, employee life insurance

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $46,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      48,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      48,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Public Law 96-427, the Federal Employees' Group Life 
Insurance Act of 1980, requires that all employees under the 
age of 65 who separate from the Federal Government for purposes 
of retirement on or after January 1, 1990, continue to make 
contributions toward their basic life insurance coverage after 
retirement until they reach the age of 65. These retirees will 
contribute two-thirds of the cost of the basic life insurance 
premium, identical to the amount contributed by active Federal 
employees for basic life insurance coverage. As with the active 
Federal employees, the Government is required to contribute 
one-third of the cost of the premium for retirees' basic 
coverage. OPM, acting as the payroll office on behalf of 
Federal retirees, has requested, and the Committee has 
provided, the funding necessary to make the required Government 
contribution associated with annuitants' post-retirement life 
insurance coverage.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a mandatory appropriation of 
$48,000,000 for the Government payment for annuitants, employee 
life insurance.

        payment to civil service retirement and disability fund

Appropriations, 2009.................................... $10,550,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................  10,276,000,000
Committee recommendation................................  10,276,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The civil service retirement and disability fund was 
established in 1920 to administer the financing and payment of 
annuities to retired Federal employees and their survivors. The 
fund covers the operation of the Civil Service Retirement 
System and the Federal Employees' Retirement System.
    This appropriation provides for the Government's share of 
retirement costs, transfers of interest on the unfunded 
liability and annuity disbursements attributable to military 
service, and survivor annuities to eligible former spouses of 
some annuitants who did not elect survivor coverage.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a mandatory appropriation of 
$10,276,000,000 for payment to the civil service retirement and 
disability fund.

                       Office of Special Counsel


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $17,468,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      18,495,000
Committee recommendation................................      18,495,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The U.S. Office of Special Counsel [OSC] was first 
established on January 1, 1979. From 1979 until 1989, it 
operated as an autonomous investigative and prosecutorial arm 
of the Merit Systems Protection Board [MSPB]. In 1989, Congress 
enacted the Whistleblower Protection Act (Public Law 101-12), 
which made OSC an independent agency within the executive 
branch. In 1994, the Uniformed Services Employment and 
Reemployment Rights Act [USERRA] (Public Law 103-353) became 
law. It defined employment-related rights of persons in 
connection with military service, prohibited discrimination 
against them because of that service, and gave OSC new 
authority to pursue remedies for violations by Federal 
agencies.
    OSC investigates Federal employee and applicant allegations 
of prohibited personnel practices (including reprisal for 
whistleblowing) and other activities prohibited by civil 
service laws, and when appropriate, prosecutes before the MSPB. 
OSC provides a secure channel for whistleblower disclosures by 
Federal employees and applicants, and may transmit 
whistleblower allegations to the agency head concerned and 
require an agency investigation. OSC also enforces the USERRA. 
OSC advises on and enforces the Hatch Act restrictions on 
political activities by Government employees.
    In 2008, OSC's assistance or action was sought by Federal 
employees and others in more than 7,399 instances, an increase 
of over 31 percent over 2007. OSC obtained 62 favorable actions 
in prohibited personnel practice cases, 32 corrective actions 
in Hatch Act complaints, and 28 corrective actions in USERRA 
cases. OSC received 445 Hatch Act complaints during 2008, an 
increase of nearly 58 percent over 2007. OSC issued 4,283 Hatch 
Act advisory opinions (both written and oral) to persons who 
sought advice, an increase of over 53 percent. During 2008, 
OSC's Disclosure Unit received 530 new disclosure matters for 
possible referral, an increase of 10 percent. The Disclosure 
Unit referred matters to agency heads for their review a total 
of 40 times during 2008.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $18,495,000 
for the Office of Special Counsel. This amount is $1,027,000 
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the 
budget request.
    The Committee strongly urges the OSC to work with 
whistleblower advocacy organizations to promote the highest 
level of confidence in the Whistleblower Protection Act and the 
OSC. The Committee acknowledges that OSC continues to 
experience dramatic growth in its caseload, as a result of 
heightened awareness of the Hatch Act stemming from media focus 
on several high-profile cases, a more vigorous focus on 
complaints under the Uniformed Services Employment and 
Reemployment Rights Act, and actions under the Whistleblower 
Protection Act. The Committee encourages the OSC to continue 
progress made to improve its case processing efficiencies.

                      Postal Regulatory Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $14,043,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      14,333,000
Committee recommendation................................      14,333,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Postal Regulatory Commission is an independent agency 
that has exercised regulatory oversight over the United States 
Postal Service since its creation by the Postal Reorganization 
Act of 1970. For over three decades, that oversight consisted 
primarily of conducting public, on-the-record hearings 
concerning proposed rates, mail classification, and major 
service changes, and recommended decisions for action to the 
Postal Service Board of Governors.
    The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (Public Law 
109-435) assigned significant new responsibilities to the 
Commission. These enhanced authorities include providing 
regulatory oversight of the pricing of Postal Service products 
and services, ensuring Postal Service transparency and 
accountability, consulting on delivery service standards and 
performance measures, consulting on international postal 
policies, preventing cross-subsidization or other 
anticompetitive postal practices, and serving as a forum to act 
on complaints with postal products and services. The Commission 
provides leadership and recommends policies that foster a 
robust and viable postal system.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation, out of the 
Postal Fund, of $14,333,000 for the Postal Regulatory 
Commission. This amount is $290,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level and the same as the budget request. The funds 
will support 74 FTEs and enable the Commission to meet its 
mission of ensuring transparency and accountability in postal 
operations, services, and finances. The Committee notes that in 
fiscal year 2010, the Commission will issue an annual 
compliance determination report assessing the Postal Service's 
compliance with the ratemaking regulations and applicable laws.

              Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................      $1,500,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       2,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,500,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Recommended by the July 22, 2004 report of the National 
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (the 9/
11 Commission), the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board 
[PCLOB] was originally established through the Intelligence 
Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-
458). The PCLOB was made a component of the White House Office 
within the Executive Office of the President.
    Under the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 
Commission Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-53), the PCLOB was 
reconstituted as an independent agency within the executive 
branch. The mission of the PCLOB is to (1) analyze and review 
actions the executive branch takes to protect the Nation from 
terrorism, ensuring that the need for such actions is balanced 
with the need to protect privacy and civil liberties; and (2) 
ensure that liberty concerns are appropriately considered in 
the development and implementation of laws, regulations, and 
policies related to efforts to protect the Nation against 
terrorism.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,500,000 for 
the PCLOB. The Committee strongly supports the mission of the 
PCLOB. The Committee notes that the former Board ceased 
operations on January 30, 2008 with the intention that a new, 
more independent Board would be instituted in its place. The 
Committee is concerned that now, 18 months later, the new PCLOB 
has not yet been reconstituted and staffed as required by 
Public Law 110-53. The Committee urges the administration to 
nominate members to the PCLOB as expeditiously as possible. The 
Committee urges the PCLOB, once it is reconstituted, to 
promptly provide a detailed budget justification to the 
Committee.

           Recovery Act Accountability and Transparency Board

Appropriations, 2009....................................  \1\$84,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

\1\Includes $84,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Recovery Act Accountability and Transparency Board 
(Recovery Board) was authorized in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) (Recovery Act). The 
Recovery Board is composed of Inspectors General of agencies 
administering programs and overseeing spending authorized in 
the Recovery Act. The Recovery Board conducts and coordinates 
activities related to the accountability, transparency, and 
oversight of spending under the Recovery Act and oversees the 
administration of Recovery.gov, a website providing detailed 
information on the implementation of the Recovery Act.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee does not recommend additional funding for the 
Recovery Board for fiscal year 2010 which is consistent with 
the budget request. Funding for the Recovery Board in fiscal 
year 2010 shall be derived from funds provided in the Recovery 
Act, which will remain available until September 30, 2011 for 
the salaries, expenses, and operating costs of the Board as 
well as the administration of Recovery.gov.

                   Securities and Exchange Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................    $970,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................   1,026,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,126,000,000

\1\Includes $10,000,000 in emergency appropriations provided in the 
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-32)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] is an 
independent agency responsible for administering many of the 
Nation's laws regulating the areas of securities and finance.
    The mission of the SEC is to administer and enforce Federal 
securities laws in order to protect investors, maintain fair, 
honest, and efficient markets, and promote capital formation. 
This includes ensuring full disclosure of financial 
information, regulating the Nation's securities markets, and 
preventing and policing fraud and malpractice in the securities 
and financial markets. The strength of the American economy and 
our Nation's financial markets is dependent upon investors' 
confidence in the financial disclosures and statements released 
by publicly traded companies. The SEC, as the investor's 
advocate oversees more than 30,000 registrants including 12,000 
public companies, 4,600 mutual funds, 11,300 investment 
advisers, 600 transfer agents, and 5,500 broker dealers.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends a total budget (obligational) 
authority of $1,126,000,000 for the salaries and expenses of 
the SEC, including $1,115,780,000 from new fee collections and 
$10,220,000 from prior year balances. This total funding level 
is $166,000,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, not 
including emergency funds provided in the Supplemental 
Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-32) and $100,000,000 
above the budget request, to allow the SEC to begin to address 
staffing shortfalls and upgrade inadequate information 
technology.
    With the markets experiencing a steady increase in the 
number of complex securities products and market participants 
and in light of problems plaguing the credit markets as a 
result of subprime lending, it is imperative that our Nation's 
top securities regulator has the resources to effectively meet 
its mandate. The Committee acknowledges that funding shortfalls 
have hampered SEC's ability to fulfill its mission. The SEC's 
staffing remain 5 percent below what the SEC was provided in 
2005 when the SEC received additional funding due to Enron and 
other corporate scandals. Staffing shortfalls impact the SEC's 
ability to ensure adequate supervision of market participants 
and promote and sustain public confidence in the integrity of 
our capital markets.
    The Committee's recommended funding increase would allow 
the SEC to return to fiscal year 2005 staffing levels and fund 
an additional 5 percent staffing increase to support more 
aggressive policing of the securities markets through 
examinations and enforcement actions. The recommended funding 
increase would strengthen SEC's examination responsibilities by 
enabling SEC's Office of Compliance Inspections and 
Examinations to hire market experts to strengthen risk-based 
oversight of the investment management industry and expand its 
inspections of credit rating agencies. The recommended funds 
would permit SEC to conduct more comprehensive examinations, 
reach a broader universe of the entities it regulates, and 
improve its ability to uncover and prosecute fraud. While the 
number of registered investment advisers dramatically grew 
since 2005, the SEC staff overseeing these entities dropped by 
over 7 percent.
    Similarly, in the SEC's Division of Enforcement, the 
recommended increase would allow the SEC to vigorously advance 
its enforcement mission by hiring more trial lawyers and 
experienced staff with specialized skills. Resource challenges 
in recent years have affected the SEC's ability to bring 
enforcement actions promptly and efficiently. Reduced staffing 
levels have prevented promising leads from being pursued and 
have resulted in cases being closed prematurely.
    The Committee also supports expansion of the SEC's Office 
of Risk Assessment and its program to bring in seasoned 
industry professionals to help uncover hidden risks to 
investors.
    In addition, the recommended increase would support urgent, 
critical investments in information technology upgrades so that 
SEC's staff have cutting edge automation support tools to 
enhance their ability to promptly handle tips, complaints, and 
referrals as well as to better identify emerging risks using 
improved surveillance tools.
    The Committee strongly believes that fair and orderly 
markets are essential to restore public confidence in and 
bolster the integrity of our capital markets. The Committee 
emphasizes that with this significant recommended funding 
increase comes a concomitant responsibility on the part of the 
SEC to aggressively safeguard the investing public. The SEC 
must be vigilant in its enforcement of securities laws, and 
failures to properly investigate and take appropriate action 
will not be condoned.
    As noted previously in this report, the Committee is aware 
of discussions to harmonize regulatory oversight of futures and 
securities products to achieve greater protection of investors, 
ensure market integrity, and promote price transparency. As 
specified earlier under the Committee's discussion of its 
recommendations for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 
the Committee directs the Government Accountability Office to 
report to Congress not later than March 1, 2010 on the extent 
of conflicts in statutes and regulations with respect to the 
similarities in futures and securities and provide 
recommendations that would reduce or eliminate discrepancies 
and gaps, enhance regulatory effectiveness and efficiency, and 
heighten market transparency.
    The Committee is concerned that American investors may be 
unwittingly investing in companies with ties to countries that 
sponsor terrorism or are linked to human rights violations. The 
Committee believes that a company's association with sponsors 
of terrorism and human rights abuses, no matter how large or 
small, can have a materially adverse result on a public 
company's operations, financial condition, earnings, and stock 
prices, all of which can negatively affect the value of an 
investment. In order to protect American investors' savings and 
to disclose these business relationships to investors, an 
Office of Global Security Risk was established within the 
Division of Corporation Finance. The Committee expects the work 
of the Office to remain a high priority during fiscal year 2010 
and directs the SEC to continue to submit quarterly reports on 
its activities.
    The Committee expects the SEC to implement key controls to 
effectively safeguard the confidentiality, integrity, and 
availability of its financial and sensitive information and 
systems.
    The Committee encourages the SEC to continue its efforts to 
improve the timeliness of disbursement of funds to investors 
victimized by securities fraud. The Committee applauds the 
SEC's efforts to establish a specialized office devoted to 
ensuring that funds are promptly disbursed and install a new 
computer system to simplify the tracking, collection, and 
distribution of assessed penalties.
    The Committee is pleased that the SEC has made strides to 
simplify complex information and improve electronic public 
access to investment information through interactive data 
systems. The Committee is aware of a growing need for SEC-
regulated entities to provide accurate and consistent reporting 
of their financial risks due to climate change. In order to 
ensure such information is provided to investors and the 
public, the SEC is encouraged to issue guidance clarifying the 
disclosures of climate change-related risk that regulated 
entities should provide in their regular financial reporting 
under current law.

                        Selective Service System


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $22,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      24,400,000
Committee recommendation................................      24,400,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Selective Service System is an independent Federal 
agency, operating with permanent authorization under the 
Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 451 et seq.). 
The agency is not part of the Department of Defense, but its 
basic mission is to be prepared to supply manpower to the Armed 
Forces adequate to ensure the security of the United States 
during a time of national emergency. Since 1973, the Armed 
Forces have relied on volunteers to fill military manpower 
requirements. However, the Selective Service System remains the 
primary vehicle by which personnel will be brought into the 
military if Congress and the President should authorize a 
return to the draft.
    In December 1987, Selective Service was tasked by law 
(Public Law 100-180, sec. 715) to develop plans for a post-
mobilization healthcare personnel delivery system capable of 
providing the necessary critically skilled healthcare personnel 
to the Armed Forces in time of emergency. An automated system 
capable of handling mass registration and inductions is now 
complete, together with necessary draft legislation, a draft 
Presidential proclamation, prototype forms and letters, and 
other products. These products will be available should the 
need arise. The development of supplemental standby products, 
such as a compliance system for healthcare personnel, continues 
using very limited existing resources.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,400,000 
for the Selective Service System. This amount is $2,400,000 
above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the 
budget request. The Committee encourages the System to continue 
the development of its Central Registrant Processing Portal 
Initiative, and to improve the cost effectiveness of the 
registration process by continuing to increase the percentage 
of electronic and automatic registrations.
    The Committee supports the allocation of $2,000,000 for 
upgrading the Service's information technology systems. A 
modernized information technology system will help improve 
business processes and national registration compliance 
statistics while sustaining an all-volunteer military 
recruiting effort. It will also ensure more accurate and 
expeditious processing of registrations, enable more secure 
storage of personally identifiable information, and facilitate 
improved customer services through the Internet.

                     Small Business Administration

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................  $1,342,280,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     779,300,000
Committee recommendation................................     860,904,000

\1\Includes $730,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).

    The Committee recommendation provides $860,904,000 for the 
Small Business Administration [SBA]. The recommendation is 
$481,376,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, which 
included funds provided in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009, and is $81,604,000 above the budget 
request. Funding is distributed among the SBA appropriation 
accounts as described below.

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................    $455,896,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     422,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     444,000,000

\1\Includes $69,000,000 provided in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).

    The Committee recommendation provides $444,000,000 for 
salaries and expenses of the SBA. The recommendation is 
$11,896,000 below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, which 
included funds provided in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 [ARRA], and is $22,000,000 above the 
budget request.
    Non-credit Business Assistance Programs.--Within the 
amounts made available under this heading, the Committee 
recommendation provides $185,630,000 for the SBA non-credit 
business assistance programs. The recommendation is $26,718,000 
above the budget request and $658,000 below the 2009 enacted 
level, which included funds provided in ARRA.
    The Committee recommendations for non-credit business 
assistance, by program, are displayed in the following table:

                 NON-CREDIT BUSINESS ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Fiscal year
                                            2010 budget      Committee
                                             estimate     recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Business Development Centers......          97,000         114,400
Drug-free Workplace Grants..............           1,030           1,030
SCORE...................................           5,148           7,000
Women's Business Centers................          13,020          14,300
Women's Business Council................             773           1,000
Microloan Technical Assistance..........          10,000          22,000
Veterans Programs.......................           2,200           2,500
PRIME...................................           3,120           5,500
Native American Outreach................           1,040           1,500
7(j) Technical Assistance...............           3,397           3,400
HUBZone.................................           2,184           3,000
Entrepreneurial Development Initiative..          20,000          10,000
                                         -------------------------------
      Total, Non-credit Business                 158,912         185,630
       Assistance Programs..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee directs that the amounts provided for SBA's 
Non-Credit Business Assistance Programs, as specified in the 
table above, shall be administered in the same manner as 
previous years and shall not be reduced, reallocated, or 
reprogrammed to provide additional funds for other programs, 
initiatives, or activities.
    The Committee continues to support the Small Business 
Development Center [SBDC] Program and recommends $114,400,000 
for fiscal year 2010, an increase of $17,400,000 above the 
budget request and $4,400,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level. The Committee is concerned with the 
administration's request to reduce funding for SBDCs in fiscal 
year 2010 to $97,000,000, a reduction of $13,000,000 below the 
fiscal year 2009 enacted level. The SBDC network--which 
encompasses over 900 service centers across the Nation--
provides management and technical assistance to an estimated 
1.2 million small business owners and aspiring entrepreneurs 
each year. As the economy struggles, SBDCs have reported a 
significant increase in demand for their expertise as 
businesses seek guidance on how to weather the economic 
downturn and as newly unemployed Americans look for advice on 
starting a small business as a new career path. Providing 
support for SBDCs is more critical than ever as our economy 
works to recover and grow.
    The Committee recommends that up to $10,000,000 shall be 
available for a new Entrepreneurial Development program 
administered by the SBA, $10,000,000 above the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level and $10,000,000 below the budget request. The 
Committee is pleased with the administration's planned 
initiatives under this proposed program to enhance the 
effectiveness of veterans assistance programs, encourage 
regional economic clusters, and provide small business 
development assistance to areas most devastated by the current 
economic crisis. The Committee directs the SBA to allocate such 
funds to the maximum extent possible to its current partners--
namely, SBDCs, Women's Business Centers, the Service Corps of 
Retired Executives [SCORE], and Veterans Business Outreach 
Centers. These partners will provide an experienced 
infrastructure for meeting the goals of the Entrepreneurial 
Development initiative. The Committee notes that the amounts 
recommended for SBA's Non-Credit Business Assistance Programs, 
as specified in the table above, shall be administered in the 
same manner as previous years and shall not be reduced, 
reallocated, or reprogrammed to provide additional funds for 
this or any other program. The Committee directs SBA to report 
to the Committee on Appropriations within 30 days of enactment 
on the strategies and goals of each initiative, methodologies 
for assessing the performance of each initiative and each 
individual project selected under each initiative, and 
methodologies planned for selection of individual projects and 
recipients. The Committee also directs SBA to provide to the 
Committee on Appropriations within 30 days of enactment an 
operating plan detailing funding planned for grants, contracts, 
and salaries and expenses of both current and new SBA 
employees, including travel expenses. Such plan shall 
individually address each proposed initiative. The Committee 
directs SBA to notify the Committee on Appropriations not less 
than 15 days prior to obligation of funds provided for the 
Entrepreneurial Development program.
    The Committee recommends $22,000,000 for grants to 
Microloan intermediaries under the Microloan program for 
marketing, management, and technical assistance provided to 
borrowers. An additional $3,000,000 is recommended under the 
heading ``Business Loans Program Account'' to support lending 
under the Microloan program. The Committee includes a provision 
that, for funding provided for fiscal year 2010, temporarily 
increases the maximum amount of grant funding eligibility for 
qualified Microloan intermediaries and temporarily waives the 
requirement for Microloan intermediaries to contribute non-
Federal matching funds. These temporary conditions will provide 
relief to Microloan intermediaries that are providing increased 
assistance to Microloan borrowers and struggling to secure 
private matching funds during the economic downturn. The 
Committee fully expects to restore these requirements for 
fiscal year 2011 funding.
    The Committee supports funding for veterans programs and 
veterans business outreach centers and provides $2,500,000 for 
veterans programs, an increase of $300,000 above the budget 
request and $1,300,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level 
to support additional grants to veterans business outreach 
centers. When determining the allocation of the additional 
funding, the Committee strongly encourages SBA to consider 
centers with significant experience in conducting outreach to 
veterans, including those previously receiving Federal funding.
    The Committee understands how critical it is to assist 
small business owners in their beginning start-up stages. 
Through the Office of Government Contracting and Business 
Development, SBA's 7(j) program provides training to 8(a) firms 
(firms that are socially or economically disadvantaged). These 
firms are eligible for Government contracts set-aside 
specifically for small businesses; however, because of a firm's 
status as a socially or economically disadvantaged firm, its 
employees need more than just financial opportunities to grow. 
These firms are also in need of technical assistance to help 
them meet the demands of these contracts. 7(j) training is a 
significant part of the 8(a) program effort to promote small 
business opportunities and growth. The Committee directs SBA to 
provide a status update report reviewing the last 5 years of 
the 7(j) program, including the number of clients trained, the 
length of training program, the cost per client per training 
program, follow-up actions, description and examples of 
curricula provided, and all other relevant information that 
would provide the Committee with insight into the performance 
of the 7(j) program. This report shall be submitted no later 
than 180 days from the date of enactment.
    Operating Expenses.--Within the amounts made available 
under this heading, the Committee recommendation provides 
$258,370,000 for SBA's operating expenses. The recommendation 
is $11,238,000 below the 2009 enacted level, which included 
funds provided in ARRA, and is $4,718,000 below the budget 
request. The funding recommendations are made in accordance 
with the information included in the budget justification, with 
the following exceptions: up to $8,000,000 is provided to hire 
80 additional FTEs to enhance operational support associated 
with the expected increase in purchases, processing, and 
monitoring of existing SBA loans; $1,000,000 is provided for 
quality assurance and best practice reviews; $1,000,000 is 
provided for a study of the next generation of equity capital 
companies; and $1,000,000 is provided as an additional amount 
for costs associated with administering the small business 
development and entrepreneurship initiatives provided in 
section 503. The Committee directs SBA to utilize funding 
provided for operating expenses in fiscal year 2010 and funding 
available from prior year appropriations, including funding 
provided in ARRA, to support full-time, dedicated staff, 
including a Director, for the Microloan program.
    The Committee is pleased with SBA's progress to date on 
implementing provisions in ARRA related to increasing access to 
capital for small businesses. The Committee notes that SBA has 
made a strong effort to implement new programs and changes in 
existing programs under ARRA in a timely manner while ensuring 
that such programs are designed and administered efficiently 
and effectively. The Committee directs SBA to continue placing 
a top priority on implementing ARRA programs.
    Within the amounts recommended for SBA's operating 
expenses, $11,690,500 is provided for the agency-wide effort to 
modernize SBA's loan management and accounting systems. Current 
systems are outdated and limit capabilities, and new systems 
are needed to enhance the management of SBA's $90,000,000,000 
loan portfolio. The Committee continues to be concerned about 
the risks inherent in such a relatively large acquisition, 
including risks related to contractor oversight. The Committee 
notes that this large modernization effort coincides with SBA's 
implementation of ARRA programs and SBA's proposal to initiate 
new entrepreneurial development programs, both of which are 
significant endeavors. The Committee directs the agency to 
place a top priority on ensuring a successful acquisition of 
and transition to the new systems because the final product 
will have a long-term impact on SBA's capabilities and 
effectiveness as an agency. SBA shall submit a quarterly 
written report to the Committee on Appropriations summarizing 
the agency's progress regarding the modernization effort, 
including milestones planned and achieved and progress on cost 
and schedule.
    The Committee strongly supports the SBA's Historically 
Underutilized Business Zone [HUBZone] program and believes that 
it is a critical resource for distressed communities, 
especially during the current economic downturn. The program 
was created to stimulate economic development and job creation 
in distressed areas by providing access to more Federal 
contracting opportunities for qualified small businesses. 
Accordingly, the Committee has provided additional funding as 
requested by the administration to improve SBA's administration 
and oversight of the HUBZone program and strongly encourages 
SBA to continue its efforts in strengthening its management and 
oversight of this important program.
    The Committee is pleased with the results of the Office of 
Personnel Management's 2008 survey, ``Best Places to Work in 
the Federal Government.'' SBA employee responses to questions 
related to job satisfaction resulted in SBA ranking 26 out of 
30 agencies, a significant improvement from the 2007 ranking of 
last place. The Committee is encouraged by the administration's 
plans to focus efforts on employee training. Training is a key 
part of improving employee morale because staff can anticipate 
professional growth and career progression within the 
organization, as well as see how improving their skills can 
contribute to improving agency performance. The Committee 
directs SBA to document a comprehensive plan for training that 
links core competencies to SBA's goals, in accordance with 
recommendations from the Government Accountability Office. 
Finally, the Committee recommends that, in addition to pursuing 
valuable outside studies of quality assurance and best practice 
reviews, senior management seek and incorporate the opinions of 
experienced career staff on further steps that can be taken to 
improve the administration of SBA programs and job satisfaction 
of SBA employees.
    In light of the increased need to assist small businesses 
that have been affected by manufacturing closures across the 
country, the Committee directs SBA, in consultation with local 
district offices, to review vacant Regional Manager positions, 
especially positions which have remained vacant for several 
years, to ensure adequate services for small businesses.
    The Committee is aware that the SBA currently has 17 
international finance specialists posted throughout the country 
at one-stop assistance centers operated by the Department of 
Commerce. This program has facilitated well over 
$10,000,000,000 in exports in the last 10 years, helping to 
create 140,000 new and higher-paying jobs. The Committee 
directs the SBA to review and make efforts to fill 
international finance specialist vacancies in high export 
areas, especially vacancies which have remained unfilled for 
several years.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................     $26,750,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      16,300,000
Committee recommendation................................      16,300,000

\1\Includes $10,000,000 provided in 2009 in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).

    The Committee recommendation provides $16,300,000 for the 
Office of Inspector General. The recommendation is $10,450,000 
below the fiscal year 2009 enacted level, which included funds 
provided in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, 
and is the same as the budget request.
    The Committee directs the Inspector General to continue 
routine analysis and reporting on SBA's modernization of its 
loan management and accounting systems, including acquisition, 
contractor oversight, implementation, and progress regarding 
budget and schedule.

                 SURETY BOND GUARANTEES REVOLVING FUND

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................     $17,000,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................       1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,000,000

\1\Includes $15,000,000 provided in 2009 in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).

    The Committee recommendation provides $1,000,000. The 
recommendation is $16,000,000 below the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level, which included funds provided in the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and is the same as the 
budget request.

                     BUSINESS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009\1\.................................    $776,980,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     236,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     236,000,000

\1\Includes $636,000,000 provided in 2009 in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5).

    The Committee recommendation provides $236,000,000. The 
recommendation is $540,980,000 below the fiscal year 2009 
enacted level, which included funds provided in the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and is equal to the 
budget request.
    The recommendation provides $153,000,000 for administrative 
expenses, which may be transferred to and merged with SBA 
salaries and expenses to cover the common overhead expenses 
associated with the business loans programs.
    The recommendation provides $3,000,000 for the Microloan 
direct loan program. An additional amount of $22,000,000 is 
recommended under the heading ``Salaries and Expenses'' for 
technical assistance grants to Microlending intermediaries. The 
Committee notes that while only 165 entities are qualified as 
Microlending intermediaries under the Microloan program, the 
Small Business Act authorizes the administration to fund up to 
300 Microloan intermediaries annually. The Committee urges SBA 
to conduct outreach to existing financial entities that may be 
well-suited to participate in the Microloan program so that the 
program can grow and expand access to microcapital across the 
country. SBA shall submit a written report to the Committee on 
Appropriations within 90 days of enactment summarizing the 
agency's plans for conducting such outreach and other plans for 
expanding the reach of the Microloan program.
    The recommendation provides $80,000,000 to subsidize the 
7(a) guaranteed loan program. For a typical year, estimated 
fees collected from lenders and borrowers fully offset 
estimated Government payments on losses under the 7(a) program. 
However, the budget requests additional funding for fiscal year 
2010 because fee collections are not expected to offset the 
cost to the Government for that year due to changes in 
assumptions related to the economic downturn. The recommended 
funding will allow SBA to continue operating the 7(a) program 
in fiscal year 2010. The Committee expects the program to 
return to typical operation when the economy recovers.
    The Committee is familiar with SBA's loan program known as 
Patriot Express, and its efforts to conduct outreach to 
veterans who may be seeking to start or grow a small business. 
The Committee directs SBA to collaborate with the U.S. 
Department of Labor, especially its Veterans Employment and 
Training Services Office, and the U.S. Veterans Administration, 
the U.S. Department of Defense, all other relevant Federal 
agencies, State and local governments, not-for profit 
organizations, and other stakeholders to identify existing 
studies, programs, resources, and all available Federal funding 
to assist veterans in starting and/or growing a small business. 
The Committee directs SBA to provide a report, no later than 
180 days from the date of enactment, on its findings and 
recommended next steps for greater assistance to veteran small 
business owners through existing grants, loans, and educational 
programs and assistance.

                     DISASTER LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................................
Budget estimate, 2010...................................    $104,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     104,000,000

    The Committee provides $104,000,000 for the Disaster Loans 
program. The recommendation is $104,000,000 above the fiscal 
year 2009 enacted level and is equal to the budget request. Of 
the total funding, $1,690,000 is recommended for two pilot 
disaster loan guarantee programs authorized in the Food, 
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-246) and 
$102,310,000 is recommended for necessary administrative 
expenses for carrying out disaster loan programs. Any direct 
loan subsidies required in fiscal year 2010 will be derived 
from available unobligated balances. As always, SBA is urged to 
seek out emergency funding in the event of a disaster requiring 
loan assistance.

        ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

    Section 520 continues a provision concerning transfer 
authority and availability of funds.
    Section 521 provides that all disaster loans issued in 
Alaska or North Dakota shall not be sold.
    Section 522 provides $59,604,000 for small business 
development and entrepreneurship initiatives, including 
programmatic and construction activities, to be awarded as 
follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Agency                                                              Project                                                 Amount
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SBA......................................  Alaska Manufacturing Extension Partnership for the AMBIT Youth Entrepreneurship Curriculum,          $200,000
                                            Anchorage, AK.
SBA......................................  Alcorn State University for the Systems Research Institute, MS...............................        $250,000
SBA......................................  Amoskeag Business Incubator, Manchester, NH..................................................        $120,000
SBA......................................  Bennett College for Women, The Center for Women's Entrepreneurship, Greensboro, NC...........        $100,000
SBA......................................  Boise State University for a research, economic development and entrepreneurial initiative,          $200,000
                                            ID.
SBA......................................  Brewer Business and Commerce Park, Brewer, ME................................................      $1,050,000
SBA......................................  Center for Economic Growth, Watervliet Innovation Center, Albany, NY.........................        $117,500
SBA......................................  Central Connecticut State University, for a manufacturing workforce initiative and technical         $100,000
                                            assistance program, New Britain, CT.
SBA......................................  Champlain Valley Office of Economic Opportunity, Chittenden Emergency Food Shelf's Community         $100,000
                                            Kitchen Expansion Project, Burlington, VT.
SBA......................................  City of Buffalo, Buffalo clean energy incubator, Buffalo, NY.................................        $117,500
SBA......................................  City of Jal, renovation of Burke Junior High School to house business ventures, Jal, NM......         $85,000
SBA......................................  City of Los Angeles, Port of Los Angeles Technology Advancement Program and Clean Technology         $250,000
                                            Development Center, Los Angeles, CA.
SBA......................................  City of Providence, Department of Planning and Development, Rhode Island Center for Life             $300,000
                                            Sciences, research, development and commercialization, Providence, RI.
SBA......................................  City of Salem, downtown revitalization ``toolbox'' program, Salem, OR........................        $200,000
SBA......................................  City of Santa Rosa, Ilfeld Warehouse business incubator, Santa Rosa, NM......................        $170,000
SBA......................................  College of Notre Dame of Maryland, for lab facilities, Baltimore, MD.........................        $100,000
SBA......................................  Colorado State University, Sustainable Biofuels Development Center, Fort Collins, CO.........        $200,000
SBA......................................  Community College of Philadelphia, Northeast Regional Center for small business education,           $100,000
                                            growth, and training, Philadelphia, PA.
SBA......................................  Community Economic Development Fund Foundation, Small Business Institute, for training and           $100,000
                                            technical assistance to stabilize small business operations, Meriden, CT.
SBA......................................  Community Links Hawaii for planning and development of Oahu Technology and Innovation Park,          $250,000
                                            Oahu, HI.
SBA......................................  Community Service Society of New York, financial education project, New York, NY.............        $117,500
SBA......................................  Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, Entrepreneurial Development and Government                  $300,000
                                            Procurement Center, Honolulu, HI.
SBA......................................  Cuyahoga Community College, veterans outreach and business development program, Cleveland, OH        $200,000
SBA......................................  Delaware Valley Industrial Resource Center [DVIRC] for small business succession planning            $175,000
                                            services, Philadelphia, PA.
SBA......................................  Department of Community Affairs, Division on Women, New Jersey Women's Microbusiness Credit          $100,000
                                            Program, for training and mentoring activities, Trenton, NJ.
SBA......................................  Detroit Renaissance, Detroit Creative Corridor Center, Detroit, MI...........................        $200,000
SBA......................................  Eastern Washington University for accelerating economic development in rural and underserved         $200,000
                                            communities of the Inland Pacific Northwest, Spokane, WA.
SBA......................................  Entrepreneurial Development Center Program, College Park, GA.................................        $125,000
SBA......................................  Fitzsimons Redevelopment Authority, Colorado Drug, Device, and Diagnostic Development                $220,000
                                            Institute, Aurora, CO.
SBA......................................  Florida Institute of Technology, Florida Advanced Combustion Center, Brevard County, FL......        $200,000
SBA......................................  Great Falls Development Authority, to support the administrative costs of the Central Montana        $137,500
                                            Growth Fund, Great Falls, MT.
SBA......................................  Greater Syracuse Chamber of Commerce, Space Alliance Technology Outreach Program [SATOP],            $117,500
                                            Syracuse, NY.
SBA......................................  Hannah Grimes Center, business incubator renovation and expansion, Keene, NH.................         $80,000
SBA......................................  Haymarket Center for a workforce development initiative, Chicago, IL.........................        $700,000
SBA......................................  HOPE Community Development Corporation for an economic development initiative, Charleston, WV        $137,500
SBA......................................  Illinois Eastern Community Colleges for the Small Business Development Center, Olney, IL.....        $200,000
SBA......................................  Illinois Institute of Technology for University Technology Park, Chicago, IL.................        $600,000
SBA......................................  Illinois State Library to expand access to Illinois public libraries, Springfield, IL........        $300,000
SBA......................................  Illinois State University for the McLean County Business Incubator, Normal, IL...............        $500,000
SBA......................................  Jackson State University for Economic and Community Development through Heritage Tourism, MS.        $500,000
SBA......................................  Kansas World Trade Center for the Wichita EcoPartnership, Wichita, KS........................        $400,000
SBA......................................  Kelley Road Business Park, Orono, ME.........................................................        $200,000
SBA......................................  Latin Chamber of Commerce, Hispanic Leadership Program, Las Vegas, NV........................        $213,333
SBA......................................  Lawrence CommunityWorks, Union Crossing Mill Redevelopment, Lawrence, MA.....................        $200,000
SBA......................................  Leavenworth Technology and Research Park, Leavenworth, KS....................................        $300,000
SBA......................................  Loring Commerce Centre Infrastructure Development for the Loring Development Authority,              $975,700
                                            Limestone, ME.
SBA......................................  Louisiana Office of Social Entrepreneurship for administrative costs of a business planning          $137,500
                                            initiative, Baton Rouge, LA.
SBA......................................  Lutheran Social Service of Minnesota, Credit Counseling Capacity Building, St. Paul, MN......        $200,000
SBA......................................  McNeese State University, Southwest Louisiana Entrepreneurial and Economic Development Center        $137,500
                                            [SEED], Lake Charles, LA.
SBA......................................  Minot State University-Bottineau, Entrepreneurial Center for Horticulture, Bottineau, ND.....        $250,000
SBA......................................  Mississippi Biotechnology Association for Capacity Building for the Mississippi Biotechnology        $250,000
                                            Industry, Ridgeland, MS.
SBA......................................  Mississippi State University for the Entrepreneurship Center to Develop New Entity Creation          $500,000
                                            [ECDEC], MS.
SBA......................................  Mississippi Technology Alliance for the Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, MS.......        $850,000
SBA......................................  Missouri Chamber Education Foundation to develop a small business technology, training and         $1,000,000
                                            outreach center, Jefferson City, MO.
SBA......................................  Montana Technology Venture Center, for expansion and operations of the TechRanch next step           $137,500
                                            program, Bozeman, MT.
SBA......................................  Nebraska Community Foundation, HomeTown Competitiveness, Lincoln, NE.........................        $275,000
SBA......................................  Neighborhood Development Center, Midtown Global Market business technical assistance, St.            $200,000
                                            Paul, MN.
SBA......................................  Nevada Center for Entrepreneurship and Technology [NCET], small business and entrepreneurship        $213,333
                                            development, NV.
SBA......................................  Nevada Small Business Development Center, for Imagine 2012, an Hispanic business development         $213,334
                                            initiative, Reno, NV.
SBA......................................  North Carolina Rural Economic Development Center for a Rural Business Finance Program,               $250,000
                                            Raleigh, NC.
SBA......................................  North Carolina School of the Arts/Winston-Salem State University, The Center for Design              $100,000
                                            Innovation, Winston-Salem, NC.
SBA......................................  Northern Virginia Community College for retraining displaced workers in Geographic                   $200,000
                                            Information Systems, Richmond, VA.
SBA......................................  Northwest Pennsylvania Incubator Association for an incubator project, Erie County, PA.......        $100,000
SBA......................................  Pellissippi Research Centre on the Oak Ridge Corridor, Alcoa, TN.............................        $750,000
SBA......................................  Phillips County Economic Development for a Entrepreneur Business Enhancement Program [EBEP],         $300,000
                                            Phillips County, KS.
SBA......................................  Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse for the Tech Belt Biosciences Initiative, Pittsburgh, PA.         $50,000
SBA......................................  Port of Clarkston, Asotin County Industrial Park infrastructure completion, Asotin County, WA        $300,000
SBA......................................  Portland Community College, sustainable careers for a green economic recovery, Portland,  OR.        $200,000
SBA......................................  Prospera (Gallatin Valley Development Corporation), Accelerated Entrepreneur Program,                $200,000
                                            Bozeman, MT.
SBA......................................  Rhode Island School of Design and Brown University, Partnership for Sustainable Development/         $150,000
                                            Rhode Island Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship [RI-CIE], for technical assistance
                                            to small businesses on green product design and marketing and on developing and
                                            commercializing innovative products and services, Providence, RI.
SBA......................................  Rural Business Energizer Program, Milbridge, ME..............................................        $150,000
SBA......................................  Rural Enterprises of Oklahoma, Inc, for a Women and Veteran's Business Resource Center at            $200,000
                                            Seminole State College, Durant, OK.
SBA......................................  Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Jersey urban entrepreneurship development           $271,050
                                            initiative, New Brunswick, NJ.
SBA......................................  Shawnee Community College for the Small Business Development Center, Ullin, IL...............        $200,000
SBA......................................  Souris Basin Regional Planning Center, North Dakota REAP Zones, ND...........................        $250,000
SBA......................................  South Dakota Rural Enterprise, Dakota Rising for an entrepreneur development system, SD......        $250,000
SBA......................................  The Cuban American National Council [CNC] New Jersey Regional Office, Latino financial               $100,000
                                            education, foreclosure prevention, and home ownership program, Union City, NJ.
SBA......................................  The University of Mississippi for the Technology Commercialization Initiative, Oxford, MS....        $250,000
SBA......................................  The University of Southern Mississippi for the Early Stage Entrepreneur and Commercialization        $500,000
                                            Development, Hattiesburg, MS.
SBA......................................  Uhlich Children's Advantage Network for job training, placement and retention services,              $400,000
                                            Chicago, IL.
SBA......................................  University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee for business development related to clean water                    $250,000
                                            technologies, Milwaukee, WI.
SBA......................................  University of Alabama for a Business Development Research Project, Tuscaloosa, AL............      $1,000,000
SBA......................................  University of Alaska, Small Business Development Center, Ketchikan, AK.......................        $300,000
SBA......................................  University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Small Business Innovation Center, Little Rock, AR.....        $225,000
SBA......................................  University of Arkansas Technology Development Foundation, Arkansas Research and Technology           $225,000
                                            Park, Fayetteville, AR.
SBA......................................  University of Connecticut for the Avery Point Technology Center, Groton, CT..................        $200,000
SBA......................................  University of Delaware, Delaware Small Business and Technology Development Center, Newark, DE        $350,000
SBA......................................  University of Maryland-Baltimore BioPark, Baltimore, MD......................................        $100,000
SBA......................................  University of Northern Iowa for MyEntreNet, a national rural entrepreneurship development            $250,000
                                            system, IA.
SBA......................................  University of Southern Maine for the Science Technology Research Center, Portland, ME........        $850,000
SBA......................................  Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts, economic development center expansion, Boston,  MA....        $200,000
SBA......................................  Urban League of Philadelphia Entrepreneurship Center, Philadelphia, PA.......................         $50,000
SBA......................................  Valencia County IT program, upgrade and training, Valencia County, NM........................        $145,000
SBA......................................  Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility, the 50 for 25 Demonstration Project,                    $50,000
                                            Burlington, VT.
SBA......................................  Vermont Farms Association for an agritourism best practices and standards project, Rochester,         $50,000
                                            VT.
SBA......................................  Vermont Small Business Development Center, technical assistance to high-tech small businesses        $250,000
                                            and emerging businesses, Randolph, VT.
SBA......................................  Virginia's Center for Innovative Technology, Mine safety technology and communication                $200,000
                                            improvements, Herndon, VA.
SBA......................................  Wayne State University for the Law School's Small Business Clinic, Detroit, MI...............        $200,000
SBA......................................  West Virginia Northern Community College, Center for Economic and Workforce Advancement,             $137,500
                                            Weirton, WV.
SBA......................................  Western Illinois University for the Small Business Development Center, Macomb, IL............        $400,000
SBA......................................  Western Kentucky University Bowling Green Data Center, Bowling Green, KY.....................      $1,100,000
SBA......................................  Women's Business Development Center, for entrepreneurial small business training &                   $100,000
                                            assistance, Stamford, CT.
SBA......................................  World Trade Center Institute Delaware, for the export assistance webinar series for business          $50,000
                                            education, Wilmington, DE.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      United States Postal Service


                   PAYMENT TO THE POSTAL SERVICE FUND

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $111,831,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     118,328,000
Committee recommendation................................     118,328,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Post Office dates back to 1775. It became the Postal 
Service in 1971 as an independent establishment of the 
executive branch of the United States Government. The Postal 
Service's basic function and obligation is to provide postal 
services to bind the Nation together through the personal, 
educational, literary, and business correspondence of the 
people. Its mission is to provide prompt, reliable, and 
efficient services to patrons in all areas and render postal 
services to all communities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends appropriations totaling 
$118,328,000 for payment to the Postal Service Fund, an 
increase of $6,497,000 above the fiscal year 2009 enacted level 
and the same as the budget request.
    This amount includes $29,000,000 for revenue forgone on 
free and reduced-rate mail pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 2401(d). The 
recommendation also includes $89,328,000 as an advance 
appropriation for fiscal year 2011, which includes $68,776,000 
for 2010 costs and $20,552,000 for 2007 and 2008 reconciliation 
adjustments.
    Revenue forgone on free and reduced-rate mail enables 
postage rates to be set at levels below the unsubsidized rates 
for certain categories of mail as authorized by subsections (c) 
and (d) of section 2401 of title 39, United States Code. Free 
mail for the blind and overseas voters will continue to be 
provided at the funding level recommended by the Committee.
    The Committee includes provisions in the bill that would 
assure that mail for overseas voting and mail for the blind 
shall continue to be free; that 6-day delivery and rural 
delivery of mail shall continue without reduction; and that 
none of the funds provided be used to consolidate or close 
small rural and other small post offices in fiscal year 2010. 
These are services that must be maintained in fiscal year 2010 
and beyond.
    The Committee believes that 6-day mail delivery is one of 
the most important services provided by the Federal Government 
to its citizens. Especially in rural and small town America, 
this critical postal service is the linchpin that serves to 
bind the Nation together.
    Mail-related Recycling Initiatives.--Every year the Postal 
Service recycles about 1 million tons of wastepaper, cardboard, 
plastics, cans, and other materials. The Postal Service also 
generates about $7,500,000 in revenue from those recycling 
activities. The Postal Service also purchases more than 
$200,000,000 worth of products containing recycled content each 
year. Many of the containers in the Postal Service mail system 
are made from recycled materials, and so are the stamped 
envelopes, post cards, stamp booklet covers, and packaging 
materials provided by the Postal Service. The adhesives used in 
U.S. postage stamps are biodegradable, and the Postal Services 
priority and express boxes and envelopes are recyclable. 
Through various continued successful partnerships, the Postal 
Service has facilitated reuse or recovery of overstock and 
outdated electronic equipment, saving tons of potential 
landfill waste.
    The Committee remains concerned about the fiscal health of 
the Postal Service. In June 2009, the Postal Service indicated 
that it anticipates a net loss of about $7,000,000,000 by the 
end of fiscal year 2009. Significant declines in mail volume, 
exacerbated by the struggling economy, have contributed to the 
most recent Postal Service financial crisis. In its unaudited 
monthly financial report to the Postal Regulatory Commission 
[PRC], the Postal Service claimed a total net loss of 
$677,000,000 for the month of May, bringing actual year-to-date 
losses to over $3,300,000,000. Compared to the same year-to-
date time period for 2008, total volume was down by 19.9 
percent and total revenues had declined by about 
$1,000,000,000.
    The Postal Service has made efforts to reduce costs, 
primarily by cutting work hours and capturing processing 
efficiencies. Through May 2009, the Postal Service had cut 
roughly $3,600,000,000 in expenses compared to the same period 
last year. In June 2009, the Postal Service indicated that cost 
savings could reach as much as $6,100,000,000 in fiscal year 
2009, exceeding expectations by $200,000,000.
    Despite its efforts to cut costs, the Postal Service fiscal 
prospects are still dire, and the Postmaster General has sought 
the aid of Congress. In particular, the Postal Service has 
requested that Congress moderate the requirement, included in 
the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 [PAEA], 
which directs the Postal Service to pre-fund a significant 
portion of its future retiree health benefits through the end 
of fiscal year 2016. Under the PAEA, the Postal Service is 
required to pay into the Postal Service Retiree Health Benefits 
Fund (the Fund) between $5,200,000,000 and $5,800,000,000 for 
each fiscal year, through fiscal year 2016. After fiscal year 
2016, any residual unliquidated liability must be amortized 
through fiscal year 2046 and paid down through regular future 
payments. Separately, the Postal Service is required to pay 
premiums to the Office of Personnel Management [OPM] for 
current retiree health benefits.
    Under its relief proposal, the Postal Service would 
continue to make annual payments to the Fund as required by the 
PAEA, but it would be permitted to use the Fund to pay for its 
current retiree health benefits, instead of making these 
separate payments from other operating funds. According to the 
Postal Service, this proposal could yield a savings of between 
$2,000,000,000 and $4,200,000,000 for each of the affected 
years. Nonetheless, the Government Accountability Office [GAO] 
has expressed concern about this proposal because it unravels 
fiscally responsible requirements that Congress established in 
the PAEA.
    To provide a limited measure of relief that maintains the 
fiscally responsible requirement to pre-fund a significant 
portion of future retiree health benefits, the Committee 
considered a proposal that would have reduced the amount of the 
required payments to the Fund and would have provided a 
benchmark for unliquidated Fund liabilities as of September 30, 
2017. If the modified stream of payments would not have 
exceeded this liabilities benchmark, then the Postal Service, 
in coordination with OPM and the Office of Management and 
Budget [OMB], would have been authorized to cut the amount of 
the required payment to the Fund for any given fiscal year 
through 2016. To maintain fiscal soundness, the provision also 
would have required an increase in payments if the stream of 
payments failed to liquidate the enumerated benchmark for the 
Fund.
    The Committee was willing to consider this proposal based 
on the results of a recent Inspector General [IG] report, which 
indicated that the stream of payments under PAEA would result 
in a 6 percent overpayment to the Fund by the end of fiscal 
year 2016. Under the IG's analysis, the current stream of 
payments required by PAEA would yield approximately 
$5,600,000,000 more than the Postal Service would need by the 
end of fiscal year 2016 to fully pre-fund its retiree health 
benefits.
    Because some experts, including OPM, have expressed 
concerns about the assumptions made in the Postal Service IG 
report, the Committee directs the Postal Service, in 
coordination with OPM and OMB, to develop a fiscally 
responsible legislative proposal to grant a limited measure of 
relief from the PAEA requirements to pre-fund retiree health 
benefits. These proposals should consider: (1) whether the 
PAEA-mandated stream of future payments overfunds through 
fiscal year 2016 the anticipated liability of the Postal 
Service for future retiree health benefits, (2) whether 
modifications to the mandated payments could meet the 
unliquidated liability goals contained in the PAEA, and (3) 
whether a decrease in mandated payments will reduce the 
incentive of the Postal Service to continue to cut additional 
costs, including the labor costs that account for the most 
significant portion of annual total costs. Additionally, these 
proposals should take into account the result of the PRC's 
study of the PAEA payments.
    Consolidation of Mail Processing Facilities.--The Committee 
understands that the Postal Service has undertaken initiatives 
to develop a mail processing network conducive to current and 
future needs, to reduce inefficiencies and redundancies, and 
increase operational flexibility without impacting service. One 
such initiative has been the realignment of area mail 
processing [AMP] facilities. The Committee is aware that the 
Quincy, Illinois AMP is among the facilities for which a 
possible realignment feasibility study has been announced. The 
Committee is concerned about the impact on the community and 
postal customers of eliminating jobs or transferring functions. 
The Committee directs the Postal Service to provide the 
Committee with a detailed explanation of the criteria used to 
select the Quincy AMP for a study no later than 30 days after 
enactment. The Committee further directs the Postal Service to 
not proceed with the Quincy AMP study or any other related 
actions to implement that study during fiscal year 2010.
    Idaho Rural Airmail Delivery.--The Committee directs the 
Postmaster General to continue rural airmail delivery service 
in Idaho. The level of service shall be no less than the 
January 2009 level.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2009....................................    $239,356,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................     244,397,000
Committee recommendation................................     244,397,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The United States Postal Service Office of Inspector 
General [OIG] is an independent organization established in 
1996 and charged with reporting to Congress on the overall 
efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of Postal Service 
programs and operations. The OIG plays a key role in 
maintaining the integrity and accountability of America's 
postal service, its revenue and assets, and its employees. The 
OIG meets this responsibility by conducting and supervising 
objective and independent audits, investigations, and other 
reviews. In fiscal year 2008, the OIG efforts resulted in 455 
audits and evaluations being completed identifying potential 
monetary benefits of nearly $1,200,000,000, 7,679 completed 
investigative cases, 928 arrests and indictments, 3,699 
administrative actions referred, $25,700,000 in monetary 
recoveries to the Postal Service, and over $207,000,000 in 
workers' compensation and contract fraud cost avoidance. As a 
result the return-on-investment was $7.54, up from $5.85 in 
fiscal year 2007.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation, out of the 
Postal Fund, of $244,397,000 for the United States Postal 
Service Office of Inspector General. This amount is $5,041,000 
above the fiscal year 2009 funding level and the same as the 
budget request. The funds will support 1,194 FTEs and enable 
the Office of Inspector General to concentrate on its fiscal 
year 2010 goals of reviewing field financial areas, audit work 
in response to Sarbanes-Oxley requirements, audits of data 
collection systems and procedures, and increasing total 
investigative financial, criminal, and administrative outcomes.

                        United States Tax Court


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2009....................................     $48,463,000
Budget estimate, 2010...................................      49,241,000
Committee recommendation................................      49,241,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The U.S. Tax Court is an independent judicial body in the 
legislative branch established in 1969 under Article I of the 
Constitution of the United States. The Court was created to 
provide a national forum for the resolution of disputes between 
taxpayers and the Internal Revenue Service, resolve cases 
expeditiously while giving careful consideration to the merits 
of each matter, and ensure the uniform interpretation of the 
Internal Revenue Code. The matters over which the Court has 
jurisdiction are set forth in various sections of title 26 of 
the United States Code.
    The Court is composed of 19 judges, one of whom the judges 
elect as chief judge. In their judicial duties the judges are 
assisted by senior judges, who participate in the adjudication 
of regular cases, and by special trial judges, who hear small 
tax cases and certain regular cases assigned to them by the 
chief judge.
    The Court conducts trial sessions throughout the United 
States, including Hawaii and Alaska. Decisions by the Court are 
reviewable by the U.S. Courts of Appeals and, if certiorari is 
granted, by the Supreme Court.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $49,241,000 
for the U.S. Tax Court. This amount is $778,000 above the 
fiscal year 2009 enacted level and the same as the budget 
request. The Committee notes that the increased funding is 
expected to help the Tax Court comply with the Court Security 
Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-177) which authorizes the United 
States Marshals Service to provide protective services to the 
Tax Court at the same level as such services are provided to 
other Federal Courts on a reimbursable basis. This level of 
protection includes the presence of United States Marshals 
Service security personnel in courtrooms where the Tax Court 
presides. In addition, the funds will enable the Tax Court to 
fill necessary staff vacancies to fulfill its statutory 
mission.

                STATEMENT CONCERNING GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The Financial Services and General Government appropriation 
bill includes general provisions which govern both the 
activities of the agencies covered by the bill, and, in some 
cases, activities of agencies, programs, and general government 
activities that are not covered by the bill.
    The bill contains a number of general provisions that have 
been carried in this bill for years and which are routine in 
nature and scope. General provisions in the bill are explained 
under this section of the report. Those general provisions that 
deal with a single agency only are shown immediately following 
that particular agency's or department's appropriation accounts 
in the bill. Those provisions that address activities or 
directives affecting all of the agencies covered in this bill 
are contained in title VI. General provisions that are 
Government-wide in scope are contained in title VII of this 
bill. General provisions applicable to the District of Columbia 
are contained in title VIII of this bill.

                                TITLE VI

                      GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS ACT

    Section 601 continues the provision prohibiting pay and 
other expenses of non-Federal parties intervening in regulatory 
or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this act.
    Section 602 continues the provision prohibiting obligations 
beyond the current fiscal year and prohibits transfers of funds 
unless expressly provided.
    Section 603 continues the provision limiting expenditures 
for consulting service through procurement contracts where such 
expenditures are a matter of public record and available for 
public inspection.
    Section 604 continues the provision prohibiting funds in 
this act from being transferred without express authority.
    Section 605 continues the provision prohibiting the use of 
funds to engage in activities that would prohibit the 
enforcement of section 307 of the 1930 Tariff Act (46 Stat. 
590).
    Section 606 continues the provision prohibiting the use of 
funds unless the recipient agrees to comply with the Buy 
American Act.
    Section 607 continues the provision prohibiting funding for 
any person or entity convicted of violating the Buy American 
Act.
    Section 608 continues the provision authorizing the 
reprogramming of funds and specifies the reprogramming 
procedures for agencies funded by this act.
    Section 609 continues the provision ensuring that 50 
percent of unobligated balances may remain available for 
certain purposes.
    Section 610 continues the provision restricting the use of 
funds for the Executive Office of the President to request 
official background reports from the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation without the written consent of the individual who 
is the subject of the report.
    Section 611 continues the provision ensuring that the cost 
accounting standards shall not apply with respect to a contract 
under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.
    Section 612 continues the provision referencing non-foreign 
area cost of living allowances.
    Section 613 continues the provision waiving restrictions on 
the purchase of non-domestic articles, materials, and supplies 
in the case of acquisition by the Federal Government of 
information technology.
    Section 614 continues a provision on the acceptance by 
agencies or commissions funded by this act, or by their 
officers or employees, of payment or reimbursement for travel, 
subsistence, or related expenses from any person or entity (or 
their representative) that engages in activities regulated by 
such agencies or commissions.
    Section 615 continues a provision allowing the Public 
Company Accounting Oversight Board to obligate amounts 
collected from monetary penalties for the purpose of funding 
scholarships for accounting students, as authorized by the 
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-204).
    Section 616 is a provision rescinding $1,500,000 from 
unobligated balances for prior year appropriations made 
available for the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board.
    Section 617 is a provision related to agricultural trade 
with Cuba.

                               TITLE VII

                  GENERAL PROVISIONS--GOVERNMENT-WIDE

                Departments, Agencies, and Corporations

    Section 701 continues the provision requiring agencies to 
administer a policy designed to ensure that all of its 
workplaces are free from the illegal use of controlled 
substances.
    Section 702 continues the provision setting specific limits 
on the cost of passenger vehicles purchased by the Federal 
Government with exceptions for police, heavy duty, electric 
hybrid, and clean fuels vehicles.
    Section 703 continues the provision allowing funds made 
available to agencies for travel to also be used for quarters 
allowances and cost-of-living allowances.
    Section 704 continues but modifies the provision 
prohibiting the government, with certain specified exceptions, 
from employing non-U.S. citizens whose posts of duty would be 
in the continental United States.
    Section 705 continues the provision ensuring that agencies 
will have authority to pay the General Services Administration 
for space renovation and other services.
    Section 706 continues the provision allowing agencies to 
use receipts from the sale of materials for acquisition, waste 
reduction and prevention, environmental management programs, 
and other Federal employee programs.
    Section 707 continues the provision providing that funds 
for administrative expenses may be used to pay rent and other 
service costs in the District of Columbia.
    Section 708 continues the provision precluding interagency 
financing of groups absent prior statutory approval.
    Section 709 continues the provision prohibiting the use of 
appropriated funds for enforcing regulations disapproved in 
accordance with the applicable law of the United States.
    Section 710 continues the provision limiting the pay 
increases of certain prevailing rate employees.
    Section 711 continues the provision limiting the amount 
that can be used for redecoration of offices under certain 
circumstances.
    Section 712 continues the provision that permits 
interagency funding of national security and emergency 
preparedness telecommunications initiatives, which benefit 
multiple Federal departments, agencies, and entities.
    Section 713 continues the provision requiring agencies to 
certify that a schedule C appointment was not created solely or 
primarily to detail the employee to the White House.
    Section 714 continues the provision prohibiting the use of 
funds to prevent Federal employees from communicating with 
Congress or to take disciplinary or personnel actions against 
employees for such communication.
    Section 715 continues the provision prohibiting Federal 
training not directly related to the performance of official 
duties.
    Section 716 continues the provision prohibiting the 
expenditure of funds for the implementation of agreements in 
certain nondisclosure policies unless certain provisions are 
included in the policies.
    Section 717 continues the provision prohibiting the use of 
appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda designed to 
support or defeat legislation pending before Congress.
    Section 718 continues the provision prohibiting the use of 
appropriated funds by an agency to provide home addresses of 
Federal employees to labor organizations, absent employee 
authorization or court order.
    Section 719 continues the provision prohibiting the use of 
appropriated funds to provide non-public information such as 
mailing or telephone lists to any person or organization 
outside of the Government without approval of the Committees on 
Appropriations.
    Section 720 continues the provision prohibiting the use of 
appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda purposes within 
the United States not authorized by Congress.
    Section 721 continues the provision directing agencies' 
employees to use official time in an honest effort to perform 
official duties.
    Section 722 continues the provision authorizing the use of 
current fiscal year funds to finance an appropriate share of 
the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board administrative 
costs.
    Section 723 continues the provision authorizing agencies to 
transfer funds to or reimburse the Government-wide Policy 
account of the General Services Administration to finance an 
appropriate share of various government-wide boards and 
councils.
    Section 724 continues the provision authorizing 
breastfeeding at any location in a Federal building or on 
Federal property.
    Section 725 continues the provision permitting interagency 
funding of the National Science and Technology Council, and 
requiring an OMB report on the budget and resources of the 
Council.
    Section 726 continues the provision requiring 
identification of the Federal agencies providing Federal funds 
and the amount provided for all proposals, solicitations, grant 
applications, forms, notifications, press releases, or other 
publications related to the distribution of funding to a State.
    Section 727 continues the provision prohibiting the use of 
funds to monitor personal information relating to the use of 
Federal Internet sites.
    Section 728 continues the provision regarding contraceptive 
coverage under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan.
    Section 729 continues the provision recognizing the U.S. 
Anti-Doping Agency as the official anti-doping agency for 
Olympic, Pan American, and Paralympic sports in the United 
States.
    Section 730 continues the provision allowing departments 
and agencies to use official travel funds to participate in the 
fractional aircraft ownership pilot programs.
    Section 731 continues the provision prohibiting funds for 
implementation of OPM regulations limiting detailees to the 
legislative branch and placing certain limitations on the Coast 
Guard Congressional Fellowship program.
    Section 732 continues the provision prohibiting the 
expenditure of funds for the acquisition of certain additional 
Federal law enforcement training facilities.
    Section 733 continues the provision providing funding for 
the Midway Atoll Airfield.
    Section 734 continues a provision that prohibits the use of 
funds to begin or announce a study or a public-private 
competition regarding the conversion to contractor performance 
of any function performed by civilian Federal employees 
pursuant to Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 or 
any other administrative regulation, directive, or policy.
    Section 735 is a new provision requiring agencies to submit 
annual inventories of activities performed pursuant to 
contracts for services and specifying other government 
reporting responsibilities relating to contracted work.
    Section 736 continues a provision, with modifications, 
providing that the adjustment in rates of basic pay for 
employees under statutory pay systems taking effect in fiscal 
year 2010 shall be an increase of 2.9 percent.
    Section 737 continues a provision that prohibits executive 
branch agencies from creating or funding prepackaged news 
stories that are broadcast or distributed in the United States 
unless specific notification conditions are met.
    Section 738 continues the provision prohibiting funds used 
in contravention of the Privacy Act, section 552a of title 5, 
United States Code or section 522.224 of title 48 of the Code 
of Federal Regulations.
    Section 739 continues the provision requiring each 
department and agency to evaluate the creditworthiness of an 
individual before issuing the individual a Government purchase 
charge card or travel card.
    Section 740 includes a provision prohibiting funds from 
being used for any Federal Government contract with any foreign 
incorporated entity which is treated as an inverted domestic 
corporation.
    Section 741 includes a provision requiring improvements to 
enhance public access to information on agency Inspector 
General websites.
    Section 742 requires the Office of Management and Budget to 
provide a report no later than 120 days after enactment on the 
status of a pilot program to develop and implement an inventory 
to track the cost and size of service contracts in at least 
three cabinet-level departments, as required by section 748 of 
division D of Public Law 110-161.
    Section 743 prohibits the Office of Personnel Management or 
any other agency from using funds to implement regulations 
changing the competitive areas under reductions-in-force for 
Federal employees.
    Section 744 repeals section 748 of the Financial Services 
and General Government Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 
111-8, Division D) relating to making permanent Executive Order 
13423 on strengthening the environmental, energy, and 
transportation management of Federal agencies.
    Section 745 continues a provision requiring reports on 
executive branch workforce composition.
    Section 746 declares the inapplicability of these general 
provisions to title IV and title VIII.

                               TITLE VIII

                GENERAL PROVISIONS--DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

    Section 801 continues the provision that specifies that an 
appropriation for a particular purpose or object shall be 
considered as the maximum amount that may be expended for said 
purpose or object.
    Section 802 continues the provision that permits funds for 
travel and payment of dues.
    Section 803 continues the provision that appropriates funds 
for refunding overpayments of taxes collected and for paying 
settlements and judgments against the District of Columbia 
government.
    Section 804 continues the provision that prohibits the use 
of the appropriation for publicity or propaganda purposes, and 
permits the use of local funds for carry out lobbying activity.
    Section 805 modifies the provision that establishes 
notification requirements for certain reprogramming and 
transfer requirements with respect to funds and specifies a 
timeframe for approval and execution of requests to reprogram 
and transfer local funds.
    Section 806 continues the provision that restricts the use 
of funds only to the objects for which the appropriations were 
made.
    Section 807 continues the provision that prohibits the use 
of Federal funds for salaries, expenses, or other costs 
associated with the offices of U.S. Senator or Representative 
under section 4(d) of the D.C. Statehood Constitutional 
Convention Initiatives of 1979.
    Section 808 continues the provision that restricts the use 
of official vehicles to official duties and not between a 
residence and workplace, except under certain circumstances.
    Section 809 continues the provision that prohibits the use 
of appropriated funds by the District of Columbia Attorney 
General or any other officer or entity of the District 
government to provide assistance for any petition drive or 
civil action which seeks to require Congress to provide for 
voting representation in Congress for the District of Columbia.
    Section 810 continues the provision that prohibits the use 
of any Federal funds in this act to carry out any program of 
distributing sterile needles or syringes for the hypodermic 
injection of any illegal drug.
    Section 811 continues the provision that includes a 
``conscience clause'' on legislation that pertains to 
contraceptive coverage by health insurance plans.
    Section 812 continues the provision that requires the Mayor 
of the District of Columbia to submit annual reports on various 
indicators pertaining to the District of Columbia.
    Section 813 continues the provision prohibiting use of 
funds to change the legality of marijuana use.
    Section 814 modifies the provision relating to abortion to 
restrict the use of Federal funds.
    Section 815 continues a provision to mitigate the necessity 
for dual budgeting of local funds when such funds are 
transferred but not expended.
    Section 816 is a new provision requiring the submittal of a 
revised appropriated funds budget that reflects the total 
amount of the approved appropriation and realigns all budget 
data for personal services and other-than-personal-services 
with anticipated actual expenditures.
    Section 817 is a new provision requiring the submittal of a 
revised appropriated funds budget for the District of Columbia 
Schools that aligns the schools budgets to actual enrollment.
    Section 818 continues the provision which limits references 
to ``this Act'' as referring to only this title.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on 
general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment 
to the House bill ``which proposes an item of appropriation 
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing 
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously 
passed by the Senate during that session.''
    Items providing funding for fiscal year 2010 which lack 
authorization are as follows:
Department of the Treasury
    Departmental Offices
    Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments
    Office of the Inspector General
    Inspector General for Tax Administration
    Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
    Financial Management Service
    Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
    Bureau of the Public Debt
    Community Development and Financial Institutions Fund
    Internal Revenue Service:
        Taxpayer Services
        Enforcement
        Operations Support
        Business Systems Modernization
        Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration
Executive Office of the President
    Office of Management and Budget
    ONDCP: Training for drug court professionals
District of Columbia
    Federal Payment for the District of Columbia Water and 
Sewer Authority
    Federal Payment for School Improvement
    Federal Payment for Consolidated Laboratory Facility
    Federal Payment to the Chief Financial Officer of the 
District of Columbia
Independent Agencies
    Election Assistance Commission
    Federal Communications Commission
    Federal Election Commission
    Federal Trade Commission
    General Services Administration:
        Federal Building Fund
        GSA E-government Fund
    Office of Government Ethics
    Office of Special Counsel
    Merit Systems Protection Board
    National Credit Union Administration: Community Development 
Revolving Loan Fund
    Securities and Exchange Commission

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on July 9, 2009, 
the Committee ordered reported an original bill (S. 1432) 
making appropriations for financial services and general 
government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, 
subject to amendment and consistent with the budget allocation, 
and authorized the chairman of the committee or the chairman of 
the subcommittee to offer the text of the Senate-reported bill 
as a committee amendment in the nature of a substitute to the 
House companion measure, by a recorded vote of 29-1, a quorum 
being present. The vote was as follows:
        Yeas                          Nays
Chairman Inouye                     Mr. Brownback
Mr. Byrd
Mr. Leahy
Mr. Harkin
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Kohl
Mrs. Murray
Mr. Dorgan
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Johnson
Ms. Landrieu
Mr. Reed
Mr. Lautenberg
Mr. Nelson
Mr. Pryor
Mr. Tester
Mr. Specter
Mr. Cochran
Mr. Bond
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Gregg
Mr. Bennett
Mrs. Hutchison
Mr. Alexander
Ms. Collins
Mr. Voinovich
Ms. Murkowski

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute 
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or 
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a 
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution 
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof 
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and 
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical 
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the 
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by 
the Committee.''
    In compliance with this rule, the following changes in 
existing law proposed to be made by this bill are shown as 
follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and existing law in 
which no change is proposed is shown in roman.

            TITLE 40--PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS


        SUBTITLE I--FEDERAL PROPERTY AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES


         Chapter 33--Acquisition, Construction, and Alteration


Sec. 3314. Delegation

(a) * * *
    (1) shall, except for the authority contained in section 
3305(b) of this title, be delegated on request to the 
appropriate [executive] federal agency when the estimated cost 
of the project does not exceed $100,000; and
    (2) may be delegated to the appropriate [executive] federal 
agency when the Administrator determines that delegation will 
promote efficiency and economy.
                                ------                                


    HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT, 1992, PUBLIC LAW 102-550


              TITLE XIII--GOVERNMENT SPONSORED ENTERPRISES


         SUBTITLE A--SUPERVISION AND REGULATION OF ENTERPRISES


                     PART 2--AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY

                        Subpart B--Housing Goals


SEC. 1338. EFFECTIVE DATE OF TRANSITION GOALS.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 1339. CAPITAL MAGNET FUND.

    (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (h) * * *
            (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

            (3) Leverage of funds.--Each grant from the Capital 
        Magnet Fund awarded under this section shall be 
        reasonably expected to result in eligible housing, or 
        economic and community development projects that 
        support or sustain an affordable housing project funded 
        by a grant under this section whose aggregate costs 
        total [at least 10 times the grant amount] at least 10 
        times the grant amount or such other amount (including 
        none) that the Secretary may require.
                                ------                                


DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUICIARY, AND RELATED 
         AGENCICES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998, PUBLIC LAW 105-119


                     TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


               General Provisions--Department of Justice

  Sec. 122. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (g)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law and subject 
to paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized 
to establish, for a period of [11 years] 12 years from date of 
enactment of this provision, a personnel management 
demonstration project providing for the compensation and 
performance management of not more than a combined total of 950 
employees who fill critical scientific, technical, engineering, 
intelligence analyst, language translator, and medical 
positions in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
                                ------                                


 UNIVERSAL SERVICE ANTIDEFICIENCY TEMPORARY SUSPENSION ACT, PUBLIC LAW 
                                108-494


                      TITLE III--UNIVERSAL SERVICE

SEC. 302. APPLICATION OF CERTAIN TITLE 31 PROVISIONS TO UNIVERSAL 
                    SERVICE FUND.

    (a) In General.--During the period beginning on the date of 
enactment of this Act and ending on [December 31, 2009] 
December 31, 2010, section 1341 and subchapter II of chapter 15 
of title 31, United States Code, do not apply--

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (b) Post-2005 Fulfillment of Protected Obligations.--
Section 1341 and subchapter II of chapter 15 of title 31, 
United States Code, do not apply after [December 31, 2009] 
December 31, 2010, to an expenditure or obligation described in 
subsection (a)(2) made or authorized during the period 
described in subsection (a).
                                ------                                


             OMNIBUS APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2009, PUBLIC LAW 
                                 111-8


 DIVISION D--FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS 
                               ACT, 2009


                               TITLE VII


                  GENERAL PROVISIONS--GOVERNMENT-WIDE


                Departments, Agencies, and Corporations

    [Sec. 748. Executive Order 13423 (72 Fed. Reg. 3919; Jan. 
24, 2007) shall remain in effect hereafter except as otherwise 
provided by law after the date of the enactment of this Act.]
                                ------                                


                        BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL


  PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
                                                     AMENDED
                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Budget authority               Outlays
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                                                               Committee    Amount  of   Committee    Amount  of
                                                               allocation      bill      allocation      bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations
 to its subcommittees of amounts in the Budget Resolution
 for 2010: Subcommittee on Financial Services and General
 Government:
    Mandatory...............................................       20,702       20,702       20,699    \1\20,699
    Discretionary...........................................       23,510       24,400       25,049    \1\25,857
Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation:
    2010....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........    \2\39,749
    2011....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        3,618
    2012....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........          689
    2013....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........          301
    2014 and future years...................................  ...........  ...........  ...........          258
Financial assistance to State and local governments for                NA          711           NA          505
 2009.......................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.

NA: Not applicable.

NOTE: Consistent with the funding recommended in the bill for tax enforcement and in accordance with section
  401(c)(2)(B) of Senate Concurrent Resolution 13 (111th Congress), the Committee anticipates that the Budget
  Committee will file a revised section 302(a) allocation for the Committee on Appropriations reflecting an
  upward adjustment of $890,000,000 in budget authority and associated outlays.

         DISCLOSURE OF CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS

    The Constitution vests in the Congress the power of the 
purse. The Committee believes strongly that Congress should 
make the decisions on how to allocate the people's money.
    As defined in Rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the 
Senate, the term ``congressionally directed spending item'' 
means a provision or report language included primarily at the 
request of a Senator, providing, authorizing, or recommending a 
specific amount of discretionary budget authority, credit 
authority, or other spending authority for a contract, loan, 
loan guarantee, grant, loan authority, or other expenditure 
with or to an entity, or targeted to a specific State, locality 
or congressional district, other than through a statutory or 
administrative, formula-driven, or competitive award process.
    For each item, a Member is required to provide a 
certification that neither the Member nor the Senator's 
immediate family has a pecuniary interest in such 
congressionally directed spending item. Such certifications are 
available to the public on the website of the Senate Committee 
on Appropriations (www.appropriations.senate.gov/senators.cfm).
    Following is a list of congressionally directed spending 
items included in the Senate recommendation discussed in this 
report, along with the name of each Senator who submitted a 
request to the Committee of jurisdiction for each item so 
identified. Neither the Committee recommendation nor this 
report contains any limited tax benefits or limited tariff 
benefits as defined in rule XLIV.

                                                                                                 CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Account                                                                               Project                                                                  Funding                         Member
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DC.......................................  Children's National Medical Center............................................................................................        $1,000,000  Senators Thad Cochran, Richard Durbin
SBA......................................  Alaska Manufacturing Extension Partnership for the AMBIT Youth Entrepreneurship Curriculum, Anchorage, AK.....................          $200,000  Senator Lisa Murkowski
SBA......................................  Alcorn State University for the Systems Research Institute, MS................................................................          $250,000  Senator Thad Cochran
SBA......................................  Amoskeag Business Incubator, Manchester, NH...................................................................................          $120,000  Senator Jeanne Shaheen
SBA......................................  Bennett College for Women, The Center for Women's Entrepreneurship, Greensboro, NC............................................          $100,000  Senator Kay Hagan
SBA......................................  Boise State University for a research, economic development and entrepreneurial initiative, ID................................          $200,000  Senators Mike Crapo, James Risch
SBA......................................  Brewer Business and Commerce Park, Brewer, ME.................................................................................        $1,050,000  Senators Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe
SBA......................................  Center for Economic Growth, Watervliet Innovation Center, Albany, NY..........................................................          $117,500  Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, Charles
                                                                                                                                                                                              Schumer
SBA......................................  Central Connecticut State University, for a manufacturing workforce initiative and technical assistance program, New Britain,           $100,000  Senator Christopher Dodd
                                            CT.
SBA......................................  Champlain Valley Office of Economic Opportunity, Chittenden Emergency Food Shelf's Community Kitchen Expansion Project,                 $100,000  Senator Bernard Sanders
                                            Burlington, VT.
SBA......................................  City of Buffalo, Buffalo clean energy incubator, Buffalo, NY..................................................................          $117,500  Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, Charles
                                                                                                                                                                                              Schumer
SBA......................................  City of Jal, renovation of Burke Junior High School to house business ventures, Jal, NM.......................................           $85,000  Senators Jeff Bingaman, Tom Udall
SBA......................................  City of Los Angeles, Port of Los Angeles Technology Advancement Program and Clean Technology Development Center, Los Angeles,           $250,000  Senator Dianne Feinstein
                                            CA.
SBA......................................  City of Providence, Department of Planning and Development, Rhode Island Center for Life Sciences, research, development and            $300,000  Senators Jack Reed, Sheldon Whitehouse
                                            commercialization, Providence, RI.
SBA......................................  City of Salem, downtown revitalization ``toolbox'' program, Salem, OR.........................................................          $200,000  Senators Jeff Merkley, Ron Wyden
SBA......................................  City of Santa Rosa, Ilfeld Warehouse business incubator, Santa Rosa, NM.......................................................          $170,000  Senators Jeff Bingaman, Tom Udall
SBA......................................  College of Notre Dame of Maryland, for lab facilities, Baltimore, MD..........................................................          $100,000  Senator Benjamin Cardin
SBA......................................  Colorado State University, Sustainable Biofuels Development Center, Fort Collins, CO..........................................          $200,000  Senator Mark Udall
SBA......................................  Community College of Philadelphia, Northeast Regional Center for small business education, growth, and training, Philadelphia,          $100,000  Senator Robert Casey
                                            PA.
SBA......................................  Community Economic Development Fund Foundation, Small Business Institute, for training and technical assistance to stabilize            $100,000  Senators Christopher Dodd, Joseph Lieberman
                                            small business operations, Meriden, CT.
SBA......................................  Community Links Hawaii for planning and development of Oahu Technology and Innovation Park, Oahu, HI..........................          $250,000  Senators Daniel Akaka, Daniel Inouye
SBA......................................  Community Service Society of New York, financial education project, New York, NY..............................................          $117,500  Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, Charles
                                                                                                                                                                                              Schumer
SBA......................................  Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, Entrepreneurial Development and Government Procurement Center, Honolulu, HI..........          $300,000  Senators Daniel Akaka, Daniel Inouye
SBA......................................  Cuyahoga Community College, veterans outreach and business development program, Cleveland, OH.................................          $200,000  Senators Sherrod Brown, George Voinovich
SBA......................................  Delaware Valley Industrial Resource Center [DVIRC] for small business succession planning services, Philadelphia, PA..........          $175,000  Senators Robert Casey, Arlen Specter
SBA......................................  Department of Community Affairs, Division on Women, New Jersey Women's Microbusiness Credit Program, for training and                   $100,000  Senators Frank Lautenberg, Robert Menendez
                                            mentoring activities, Trenton, NJ.
SBA......................................  Detroit Renaissance, Detroit Creative Corridor Center, Detroit, MI............................................................          $200,000  Senators Carl Levin, Debbie Stabenow
SBA......................................  Eastern Washington University for accelerating economic development in rural and underserved communities of the Inland Pacific          $200,000  Senators Maria Cantwell, Patty Murray
                                            Northwest, Spokane, WA.
SBA......................................  Entrepreneurial Development Center Program, College Park, GA..................................................................          $125,000  Senators Saxby Chambliss, Johnny Isakson
SBA......................................  Fitzsimons Redevelopment Authority, Colorado Drug, Device, and Diagnostic Development Institute, Aurora, CO...................          $220,000  Senator Michael Bennet
SBA......................................  Florida Institute of Technology, Florida Advanced Combustion Center, Brevard County, FL.......................................          $200,000  Senator Bill Nelson
SBA......................................  Great Falls Development Authority, to support the administrative costs of the Central Montana Growth Fund, Great Falls, MT....          $137,500  Senators Max Baucus, Jon Tester
SBA......................................  Greater Syracuse Chamber of Commerce, Space Alliance Technology Outreach Program [SATOP], Syracuse, NY........................          $117,500  Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, Charles
                                                                                                                                                                                              Schumer
SBA......................................  Hannah Grimes Center, business incubator renovation and expansion, Keene, NH..................................................           $80,000  Senator Jeanne Shaheen
SBA......................................  Haymarket Center for a workforce development initiative, Chicago, IL..........................................................          $700,000  Senator Richard Durbin
SBA......................................  HOPE Community Development Corporation for an economic development initiative, Charleston, WV.................................          $137,500  Senator Robert Byrd
SBA......................................  Illinois Eastern Community Colleges for the Small Business Development Center, Olney, IL......................................          $200,000  Senator Richard Durbin
SBA......................................  Illinois Institute of Technology for University Technology Park, Chicago, IL..................................................          $600,000  Senator Richard Durbin
SBA......................................  Illinois State Library to expand access to Illinois public libraries, Springfield, IL.........................................          $300,000  Senator Richard Durbin
SBA......................................  Illinois State University for the McLean County Business Incubator, Normal, IL................................................          $500,000  Senator Richard Durbin
SBA......................................  Jackson State University for Economic and Community Development through Heritage Tourism, MS..................................          $500,000  Senator Thad Cochran
SBA......................................  Kansas World Trade Center for the Wichita EcoPartnership, Wichita, KS.........................................................          $400,000  Senators Sam Brownback, Pat Roberts
SBA......................................  Kelley Road Business Park, Orono, ME..........................................................................................          $200,000  Senator Susan Collins
SBA......................................  Latin Chamber of Commerce, Hispanic Leadership Program, Las Vegas, NV.........................................................          $213,333  Senator Harry Reid
SBA......................................  Lawrence CommunityWorks, Union Crossing Mill Redevelopment, Lawrence, MA......................................................          $200,000  Senators Edward Kennedy, John Kerry
SBA......................................  Leavenworth Technology and Research Park, Leavenworth, KS.....................................................................          $300,000  Senator Sam Brownback
SBA......................................  Loring Commerce Centre Infrastructure Development for the Loring Development Authority, Limestone, ME.........................          $975,700  Senators Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe
SBA......................................  Louisiana Office of Social Entrepreneurship for administrative costs of a business planning initiative, Baton Rouge, LA.......          $137,500  Senator Mary Landrieu
SBA......................................  Lutheran Social Service of Minnesota, Credit Counseling Capacity Building, St. Paul, MN.......................................          $200,000  Senators Al Franken, Amy Klobuchar
SBA......................................  McNeese State University, Southwest Louisiana Entrepreneurial and Economic Development Center [SEED], Lake Charles, LA........          $137,500  Senator Mary Landrieu
SBA......................................  Minot State University-Bottineau, Entrepreneurial Center for Horticulture, Bottineau, ND......................................          $250,000  Senators Kent Conrad, Byron Dorgan
SBA......................................  Mississippi Biotechnology Association for Capacity Building for the Mississippi Biotechnology Industry, Ridgeland, MS.........          $250,000  Senator Thad Cochran
SBA......................................  Mississippi State University for the Entrepreneurship Center to Develop New Entity Creation [ECDEC], MS.......................          $500,000  Senators Thad Cochran, Roger Wicker
SBA......................................  Mississippi Technology Alliance for the Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, MS........................................          $850,000  Senators Thad Cochran, Roger Wicker
SBA......................................  Missouri Chamber Education Foundation to develop a small business technology, training and outreach center, Jefferson City, MO        $1,000,000  Senator Christopher Bond
SBA......................................  Montana Technology Venture Center, for expansion and operations of the TechRanch next step program, Bozeman, MT...............          $137,500  Senators Max Baucus, Jon Tester
SBA......................................  Nebraska Community Foundation, HomeTown Competitiveness, Lincoln, NE..........................................................          $275,000  Senator Ben Nelson
SBA......................................  Neighborhood Development Center, Midtown Global Market business technical assistance, St. Paul, MN............................          $200,000  Senators Al Franken, Amy Klobuchar
SBA......................................  Nevada Center for Entrepreneurship and Technology [NCET], small business and entrepreneurship development, NV.................          $213,333  Senator Harry Reid
SBA......................................  Nevada Small Business Development Center, for Imagine 2012, an Hispanic business development initiative, Reno, NV.............          $213,334  Senator Harry Reid
SBA......................................  North Carolina Rural Economic Development Center for a Rural Business Finance Program, Raleigh, NC............................          $250,000  Senators Richard Burr, Kay Hagan
SBA......................................  North Carolina School of the Arts/Winston-Salem State University, The Center for Design Innovation, Winston-Salem, NC.........          $100,000  Senator Kay Hagan
SBA......................................  Northern Virginia Community College for retraining displaced workers in Geographic Information Systems, Richmond, VA..........          $200,000  Senators Mark Warner, James Webb
SBA......................................  Northwest Pennsylvania Incubator Association for an incubator project, Erie County, PA........................................          $100,000  Senator Robert Casey
SBA......................................  Pellissippi Research Centre on the Oak Ridge Corridor, Alcoa, TN..............................................................          $750,000  Senators Lamar Alexander, Bob Corker
SBA......................................  Phillips County Economic Development for a Entrepreneur Business Enhancement Program [EBEP], Phillips County, KS..............          $300,000  Senator Sam Brownback
SBA......................................  Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse for the Tech Belt Biosciences Initiative, Pittsburgh, PA..................................           $50,000  Senators Robert Casey, Arlen Specter
SBA......................................  Port of Clarkston, Asotin County Industrial Park infrastructure completion, Asotin County, WA.................................          $300,000  Senator Patty Murray
SBA......................................  Portland Community College, sustainable careers for a green economic recovery, Portland, OR...................................          $200,000  Senators Jeff Merkley, Ron Wyden
SBA......................................  Prospera (Gallatin Valley Development Corporation), Accelerated Entrepreneur Program, Bozeman, MT.............................          $200,000  Senator Max Baucus
SBA......................................  Rhode Island School of Design and Brown University, Partnership for Sustainable Development/Rhode Island Center for Innovation          $150,000  Senators Jack Reed, Sheldon Whitehouse
                                            and Entrepreneurship [RI-CIE], for technical assistance to small businesses on green product design and marketing and on
                                            developing and commercializing innovative products and services, Providence, RI.
SBA......................................  Rural Business Energizer Program, Milbridge, ME...............................................................................          $150,000  Senators Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe
SBA......................................  Rural Enterprises of Oklahoma, Inc, for a Women and Veteran's Business Resource Center at Seminole State College, Durant, OK..          $200,000  Senator James Inhofe
SBA......................................  Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Jersey urban entrepreneurship development initiative, New Brunswick, NJ......          $271,050  Senators Frank Lautenberg, Robert Menendez
SBA......................................  Shawnee Community College for the Small Business Development Center, Ullin, IL................................................          $200,000  Senator Richard Durbin
SBA......................................  Souris Basin Regional Planning Center, North Dakota REAP Zones, ND............................................................          $250,000  Senators Kent Conrad, Byron Dorgan
SBA......................................  South Dakota Rural Enterprise, Dakota Rising for an entrepreneur development system, SD.......................................          $250,000  Senator Tim Johnson
SBA......................................  The Cuban American National Council [CNC] New Jersey Regional Office, Latino financial education, foreclosure prevention, and           $100,000  Senators Frank Lautenberg, Robert Menendez
                                            home ownership program, Union City, NJ.
SBA......................................  The University of Mississippi for the Technology Commercialization Initiative, Oxford, MS.....................................          $250,000  Senator Thad Cochran
SBA......................................  The University of Southern Mississippi for the Early Stage Entrepreneur and Commercialization Development, Hattiesburg, MS....          $500,000  Senator Thad Cochran
SBA......................................  Uhlich Children's Advantage Network for job training, placement and retention services, Chicago, IL...........................          $400,000  Senator Richard Durbin
SBA......................................  University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee for business development related to clean water technologies, Milwaukee, WI.................          $250,000  Senator Herb Kohl
SBA......................................  University of Alabama for a Business Development Research Project, Tuscaloosa, AL.............................................        $1,000,000  Senators Jeff Sessions, Richard Shelby
SBA......................................  University of Alaska, Small Business Development Center, Ketchikan, AK........................................................          $300,000  Senators Mark Begich, Lisa Murkowski
SBA......................................  University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Small Business Innovation Center, Little Rock, AR......................................          $225,000  Senators Blanche Lincoln, Mark Pryor
SBA......................................  University of Arkansas Technology Development Foundation, Arkansas Research and Technology Park, Fayetteville, AR.............          $225,000  Senators Blanche Lincoln, Mark Pryor
SBA......................................  University of Connecticut for the Avery Point Technology Center, Groton, CT...................................................          $200,000  Senators Christopher Dodd, Joseph Lieberman
SBA......................................  University of Delaware, Delaware Small Business and Technology Development Center, Newark, DE.................................          $350,000  Senators Thomas Carper, Edward Kaufman
SBA......................................  University of Maryland-Baltimore BioPark, Baltimore, MD.......................................................................          $100,000  Senator Benjamin Cardin
SBA......................................  University of Northern Iowa for MyEntreNet, a national rural entrepreneurship development system, IA..........................          $250,000  Senators Charles Grassley, Tom Harkin
SBA......................................  University of Southern Maine for the Science Technology Research Center, Portland, ME.........................................          $850,000  Senator Susan Collins
SBA......................................  Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts, economic development center expansion, Boston, MA......................................          $200,000  Senators Edward Kennedy, John Kerry
SBA......................................  Urban League of Philadelphia Entrepreneurship Center, Philadelphia, PA........................................................           $50,000  Senators Robert Casey, Arlen Specter
SBA......................................  Valencia County IT program, upgrade and training, Valencia County, NM.........................................................          $145,000  Senators Jeff Bingaman, Tom Udall
SBA......................................  Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility, the 50 for 25 Demonstration Project, Burlington, VT.............................           $50,000  Senator Bernard Sanders
SBA......................................  Vermont Farms Association for an agritourism best practices and standards project, Rochester, VT..............................           $50,000  Senator Bernard Sanders
SBA......................................  Vermont Small Business Development Center, technical assistance to high-tech small businesses and emerging businesses,                  $250,000  Senator Patrick Leahy
                                            Randolph, VT.
SBA......................................  Virginia's Center for Innovative Technology, Mine safety technology and communication improvements, Herndon, VA...............          $200,000  Senators Mark Warner, James Webb
SBA......................................  Wayne State University for the Law School's Small Business Clinic, Detroit, MI................................................          $200,000  Senators Carl Levin, Debbie Stabenow
SBA......................................  West Virginia Northern Community College, Center for Economic and Workforce Advancement, Weirton, WV..........................          $137,500  Senator Robert Byrd
SBA......................................  Western Illinois University for the Small Business Development Center, Macomb, IL.............................................          $400,000  Senator Richard Durbin
SBA......................................  Western Kentucky University Bowling Green Data Center, Bowling Green, KY......................................................        $1,100,000  Senator Mitch McConnell
SBA......................................  Women's Business Development Center, for entrepreneurial small business training & assistance, Stamford, CT...................          $100,000  Senators Christopher Dodd, Joseph Lieberman
SBA......................................  World Trade Center Institute Delaware, for the export assistance webinar series for business education, Wilmington, DE........           $50,000  Senators Thomas Carper, Edward Kaufman
Treasury.................................  Financial Education and Pre-home Ownership Counseling Demonstration Project, HI...............................................        $3,150,000  Senators Daniel Akaka, Daniel Inouye
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                                                                   JUDICIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Account                                                                               Project                                                                  Funding                         Member
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSA......................................  Georgia, Savannah, United States Courthouse...................................................................................        $7,900,000  The Judiciary, Senator Saxby Chambliss
GSA......................................  Texas, San Antonio, United States Courthouse..................................................................................        $4,000,000  The Judiciary, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
GSA......................................  Utah, Salt Lake City, United States Courthouse................................................................................      $211,000,000  The Judiciary, Senators Robert Bennett,
                                                                                                                                                                                              Orrin Hatch
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                                                                 PRESIDENTIALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Account                                                                               Project                                                                  Funding                         Member
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSA......................................  California, Calexico, West Land Port of Entry.................................................................................        $9,437,000  The President
GSA......................................  Colorado, Lakewood, Denver Federal Center Remediation.........................................................................        $9,962,000  The President
GSA......................................  District of Columbia, Southeast Federal Center Remediation....................................................................       $15,000,000  The President
GSA......................................  Florida, Miami, Federal Bureau of Investigation Field Office Consolidation....................................................      $190,675,000  The President
GSA......................................  Maine, Madawaska, Land Port of Entry..........................................................................................       $50,127,000  The President
GSA......................................  Maryland, White Oak, Food and Drug Administration Consolidation...............................................................      $137,871,000  The President, Senators Barbara Mikulski,
                                                                                                                                                                                              Benjamin Cardin, Orrin Hatch
GSA......................................  Pennsylvania, Lancaster United States Courthouse..............................................................................        $6,500,000  The President, Senator Arlen Specter
GSA......................................  Texas, El Paso, Tornillo-Guadalupe, Land Port of Entry........................................................................       $91,565,000  The President, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
GSA......................................  District of Columbia, East Wing Infrastructure Systems Replacement............................................................      $114,500,000  The President
GSA......................................  District of Columbia, Eisenhower Executive Office Building Courtyard Replacement..............................................       $10,000,000  The President
GSA......................................  District of Columbia, Eisenhower Executive Office Building Roof Replacement...................................................       $15,000,000  The President
GSA......................................  District of Columbia, New Executive Office Building...........................................................................       $30,276,000  The President
NARA.....................................  FDR Presidential Library and Museum Renovation................................................................................       $17,500,000  The President, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
ONDCP....................................  National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws...................................................................................        $1,250,000  The President
ONDCP....................................  National Drug Court Institute.................................................................................................        $1,000,000  The President
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2010
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                         Senate Committee recommendation
                                                                                                                             compared with (+ or -)
                                Item                                       2009       Budget estimate     Committee    ---------------------------------
                                                                      appropriation                     recommendation        2009
                                                                                                                         appropriation   Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

                        Departmental Offices

Salaries and expenses..............................................         278,870          302,388          305,712          +26,842           +3,324
    Executive direction............................................         (21,619)         (22,383)         (22,383)           (+764)  ...............
    Economic policies and programs.................................         (45,910)         (44,749)         (47,249)         (+1,339)         (+2,500)
    Financial policies and programs................................         (36,039)         (47,580)         (48,580)        (+12,541)         (+1,000)
    Terrorism and Financial Intelligence...........................         (62,098)         (64,611)         (64,611)         (+2,513)  ...............
    Treasury-wide management.......................................         (21,600)         (22,779)         (22,779)         (+1,179)  ...............
    Administration.................................................         (91,604)        (100,286)        (100,110)         (+8,506)           (-176)
Department-wide systems and capital investments programs...........          26,975            9,544            9,544          -17,431   ...............
Office of Inspector General........................................          26,125           26,700           29,700           +3,575           +3,000

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration..................         146,083          149,000          152,000           +5,917           +3,000
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5)....................           7,000   ...............  ...............          -7,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................         153,083          149,000          152,000           -1,083           +3,000

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network...............................          91,465          102,760          104,260          +12,795           +1,500
Treasury forfeiture fund (rescission)..............................         -30,000          -50,000          -50,000          -20,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Departmental Offices..................................         546,518          540,392          551,216           +4,698          +10,824
          Non-emergency............................................        (569,518)        (590,392)        (601,216)        (+31,698)        (+10,824)
          Emergency................................................          (7,000)  ...............  ...............         (-7,000)  ...............

Financial Management Service.......................................         239,785          244,132          244,132           +4,347   ...............

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau:
    Salaries and expenses..........................................          99,065          105,000          103,000           +3,935           -2,000
    Offsetting collections.........................................  ...............         -75,000   ...............  ...............         +75,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Direct appropriation.........................................          99,065           30,000          103,000           +3,935          +73,000

Bureau of the Public Debt..........................................         177,352          182,244          182,244           +4,892   ...............

Community development financial institutions fund program account..         107,000          243,600          246,750         +139,750           +3,150
    Capital Magnet Fund............................................  ...............         (80,000)         (80,000)        (+80,000)  ...............
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5)....................         100,000   ...............  ...............        -100,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................         207,000          243,600          246,750          +39,750           +3,150

Payment of Government losses in shipment...........................           2,000            2,000            2,000   ...............  ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Department of the Treasury, non-IRS...................       1,271,720        1,242,368        1,329,342          +57,622          +86,974
          Non-emergency............................................      (1,194,720)      (1,292,368)      (1,379,342)       (+184,622)        (+86,974)
          Emergency................................................        (107,000)  ...............  ...............       (-107,000)  ...............

                      Internal Revenue Service

Taxpayer services..................................................       2,293,000        2,269,830        2,275,830          -17,170           +6,000
Enforcement........................................................       5,117,267        4,904,000        5,504,000         +386,733         +600,000
Enhanced tax enforcement activities................................  ...............         600,000   ...............  ...............        -600,000
Operations support.................................................       3,867,011        4,082,984        4,082,984         +215,973   ...............
Business systems modernization.....................................         229,914          253,674          274,119          +44,205          +20,445

Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration.........................          15,406           15,512           15,512             +106   ...............
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5)....................          80,000   ...............  ...............         -80,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................          95,406           15,512           15,512          -79,894   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Internal Revenue Service..............................      11,602,598       12,126,000       12,152,445         +549,847          +26,445
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Total, title I, Department of the Treasury...................      12,874,318       13,368,368       13,481,787         +607,469         +113,419
          Appropriations...........................................     (12,717,318)     (13,418,368)     (13,531,787)       (+814,469)       (+113,419)
          Rescissions..............................................        (-30,000)        (-50,000)        (-50,000)        (-20,000)  ...............
          Emergency appropriations.................................        (187,000)  ...............  ...............       (-187,000)  ...............
      (Mandatory)..................................................          (2,000)          (2,000)          (2,000)  ...............  ...............
      (Discretionary less emergencies).............................     (12,685,318)     (13,366,368)     (13,479,787)       (+794,469)       (+113,419)
                                                                    ====================================================================================
 TITLE II--EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED
                          TO THE PRESIDENT

                          The White House

Salaries and expenses..............................................          53,899           59,319           59,319           +5,420   ...............
    Compensation of the President..................................             450              450              450   ...............  ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and expenses.................................          54,349           59,769           59,769           +5,420   ...............

Executive Residence at the White House:
    Operating expenses.............................................          13,363           13,838           13,838             +475   ...............
    White House repair and restoration.............................           1,600            2,500            2,500             +900   ...............

Council of Economic Advisers.......................................           4,118            4,200            4,200              +82   ...............
Office of Policy Development.......................................           3,550   ...............  ...............          -3,550   ...............
National Security Council..........................................           9,029           12,231           12,231           +3,202   ...............
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-32)...................           2,936   ...............  ...............          -2,936   ...............
Office of Administration...........................................         101,333          115,280          115,280          +13,947   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, The White House.......................................         190,278          207,818          207,818          +17,540   ...............

Office of Management and Budget....................................          87,972           92,687           92,687           +4,715   ...............

               Office of National Drug Control Policy

Salaries and expenses..............................................          27,200           27,575           28,575           +1,375           +1,000
Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center...........................           3,000            1,000            1,000           -2,000   ...............
High intensity drug trafficking areas program......................         234,000          220,000          234,000   ...............         +14,000
Other Federal drug control programs................................         174,700          174,000          174,750              +50             +750
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of National Drug Control Policy................         438,900          422,575          438,325             -575          +15,750

Unanticipated needs................................................           1,000            1,000            1,000   ...............  ...............
Partnership fund for program integrity innovation..................  ...............         175,000           40,000          +40,000         -135,000
Presidential transition administrative support.....................           8,000   ...............  ...............          -8,000   ...............

Special Assistance to the President and Official Residence of the
 Vice President:
    Salaries and expenses..........................................           4,496            4,604            4,604             +108   ...............
    Operating expenses.............................................             323              330              330               +7   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Total, title II, Executive Office of the President and Funds          730,969          904,014          784,764          +53,795         -119,250
       Appropriated to the President...............................
          Appropriations...........................................        (730,969)        (904,014)        (784,764)        (+53,795)       (-119,250)
              (Mandatory)..........................................            (450)            (450)            (450)  ...............  ...............
              (Discretionary)......................................        (730,519)        (903,564)        (784,314)        (+53,795)       (-119,250)
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                      TITLE III--THE JUDICIARY

                 Supreme Court of the United States

Salaries and expenses:
    Salaries of justices...........................................           2,119            2,166            2,166              +47   ...............
    Other salaries and expenses....................................          67,658           72,574           71,915           +4,257             -659
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................          69,777           74,740           74,081           +4,304             -659

Care of the building and grounds...................................          18,447           14,568           14,525           -3,922              -43
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Supreme Court of the United States....................          88,224           89,308           88,606             +382             -702

       United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Salaries and expenses:
    Salaries of judges.............................................           2,356            2,491            2,491             +135   ...............
    Other salaries and expenses....................................          28,028           34,490           29,809           +1,781           -4,681
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit          30,384           36,981           32,300           +1,916           -4,681

             United States Court of International Trade

Salaries and expenses:
    Salaries of judges.............................................           1,696            1,715            1,715              +19   ...............
    Other salaries and expenses....................................          17,909           19,802           19,659           +1,750             -143
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, United States Court of International Trade............          19,605           21,517           21,374           +1,769             -143

  Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services

Salaries and expenses:
    Salaries of judges and bankruptcy judges.......................         323,911          340,000          340,000          +16,089   ...............
    Judges COLA....................................................           6,000            7,000            7,000           +1,000   ...............
    Other salaries and expenses....................................       4,471,458        4,815,252        4,729,845         +258,387          -85,407
        Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-32)...............          10,000   ...............  ...............         -10,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Salaries and expenses..........................       4,811,369        5,162,252        5,076,845         +265,476          -85,407

Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund.............................           4,253            5,428            5,428           +1,175   ...............
Defender services..................................................         849,400          982,646          975,504         +126,104           -7,142
Fees of jurors and commissioners...................................          62,206           63,401           62,275              +69           -1,126
Court security.....................................................         428,858          463,642          457,353          +28,495           -6,289
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial       6,156,086        6,677,369        6,577,405         +421,319          -99,964
       Services....................................................

         Administrative Office of the United States Courts

Salaries and expenses..............................................          79,049           83,963           83,075           +4,026             -888

                      Federal Judicial Center

Salaries and expenses..............................................          25,725           27,486           27,328           +1,603             -158

                     Judicial Retirement Funds

Payment to judiciary trust funds...................................          76,140           82,374           82,374           +6,234   ...............

                United States Sentencing Commission

Salaries and expenses..............................................          16,225           17,056           16,837             +612             -219
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Total, title III, the Judiciary..............................       6,491,438        7,036,054        6,929,299         +437,861         -106,755
          Appropriations...........................................      (6,481,438)      (7,036,054)      (6,929,299)       (+447,861)       (-106,755)
              (Mandatory)..........................................        (406,222)        (428,746)        (428,746)        (+22,524)  ...............
              (Discretionary)......................................      (6,075,216)      (6,607,308)      (6,500,553)       (+425,337)       (-106,755)
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                   TITLE IV--DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

                           FEDERAL FUNDS

Federal payment for Resident Tuition Support.......................          35,100           35,100           35,100   ...............  ...............
Federal payment for Emergency Planning and Security Costs in the             39,177           15,000           15,350          -23,827             +350
 District of Columbia..............................................
Federal payment to the District of Columbia Courts.................         248,409          248,952          258,517          +10,108           +9,565
Defender Services in District of Columbia Courts...................          52,475           52,475           55,000           +2,525           +2,525
Federal payment to the Court Services and Offender Supervision              203,490          212,408          212,408           +8,918   ...............
 Agency for the District of Columbia...............................
Federal payment to the District of Columbia Public Defender Service          35,659           37,316           37,316           +1,657   ...............
Federal payment to the District of Columbia Water and Sewer                  16,000           20,000           20,000           +4,000   ...............
 Authority.........................................................
Federal payment to the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council.......           1,774            1,774            1,774   ...............  ...............
Federal payment for Judicial Commissions...........................  ...............             500              500             +500   ...............
Federal payment to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer of the           4,888   ...............           1,000           -3,888           +1,000
 District of Columbia..............................................
Federal payment for School Improvement.............................          54,000           74,400           75,400          +21,400           +1,000
Federal payment to jump start public school reform.................          20,000   ...............  ...............         -20,000   ...............
Federal payment for consolidated laboratory facility...............          21,000           15,000           15,000           -6,000   ...............
Federal payment for the D.C. National Guard........................  ...............           2,000   ...............  ...............          -2,000
Federal payment for permanent supportive housing...................  ...............          19,200   ...............  ...............         -19,200
Federal payment for reconnecting disconnected youth................  ...............           5,000   ...............  ...............          -5,000
Federal payment for Central Library/branch locations...............           7,000   ...............  ...............          -7,000   ...............
Federal payment to the Executive Office of the Mayor...............           3,388   ...............  ...............          -3,388   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Total, title IV, District of Columbia........................         742,360          739,125          727,365          -14,995          -11,760
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                TITLE V--OTHER INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

Administrative Conference of the United States.....................           1,500            2,625            1,500   ...............          -1,125
Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation.........................           1,000   ...............           1,000   ...............          +1,000
Commodity Futures Trading Commission...............................         146,000          160,600          177,000          +31,000          +16,400
Consumer Product Safety Commission.................................         105,404          107,000          115,000           +9,596           +8,000

                   Election Assistance Commission

Salaries and expenses..............................................          17,959           16,530           16,530           -1,429   ...............
Election reform programs...........................................         106,000           52,000           52,000          -54,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Election Assistance Commission........................         123,959           68,530           68,530          -55,429   ...............

                 Federal Communications Commission

Salaries and expenses..............................................         341,875          335,794          335,794           -6,081   ...............
Transfer from USF for OIG audits...................................         (25,480)  ...............  ...............        (-25,480)  ...............
Offsetting fee collections--current year...........................        -341,875         -334,794         -335,794           +6,081           -1,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Direct appropriation.........................................  ...............           1,000   ...............  ...............          -1,000

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: Office of Inspector General          (27,495)         (37,942)         (37,942)        (+10,447)  ...............
 (by transfer).....................................................
Federal Election Commission........................................          63,618           64,000           67,000           +3,382           +3,000
Federal Labor Relations Authority..................................          22,674           24,773           24,773           +2,099   ...............

                      Federal Trade Commission

Salaries and expenses..............................................         259,200          287,200          289,300          +30,100           +2,100
Offsetting fee collections--current year...........................        -168,000         -102,000         -102,000          +66,000   ...............
Offsetting fee collections, telephone database.....................         -21,000          -19,000          -21,000   ...............          -2,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Direct appropriation.........................................          70,200          166,200          166,300          +96,100             +100

                Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission

Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-32).......................           8,000   ...............  ...............          -8,000   ...............

                  General Services Administration

                       Federal Buildings Fund

Appropriations.....................................................        (651,198)        (525,000)        (482,900)       (-168,298)        (-42,100)

Limitations on availability of revenue:
    Construction and acquisition of facilities.....................         746,317          657,637          734,037          -12,280          +76,400
    Repairs and alterations........................................         692,374          496,276          453,776         -238,598          -42,500
    Installment acquisition payments...............................         149,570          140,525          140,525           -9,045   ...............
    Rental of space................................................       4,642,156        4,879,871        4,829,871         +187,715          -50,000
    Building operations............................................       2,197,354        2,356,376        2,330,376         +133,022          -26,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Limitations on availability of revenue.............       8,427,771        8,530,685        8,488,585          +60,814          -42,100

Repayment of debt..................................................          56,865           66,360           66,360           +9,495   ...............
Rental income to fund..............................................      -8,134,239       -8,223,000       -8,223,000          -88,761   ...............
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5)........................       5,550,000   ...............  ...............      -5,550,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Buildings Fund................................       5,900,397          374,045          331,945       -5,568,452          -42,100
          Non-emergency............................................        (350,397)        (374,045)        (331,945)        (-18,452)        (-42,100)
          Emergency................................................      (5,550,000)  ...............  ...............     (-5,550,000)  ...............

Energy-efficient Federal motor vehicle fleet procurement                    300,000   ...............  ...............        -300,000   ...............
 (emergency) (Public Law 111-5)....................................
Government-wide policy.............................................          54,578           65,165           61,165           +6,587           -4,000
Operating expenses.................................................          70,645           71,881           71,881           +1,236   ...............
Office of Inspector General........................................          54,000           60,080           58,000           +4,000           -2,080
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5)....................           7,000   ...............  ...............          -7,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................          61,000           60,080           58,000           -3,000           -2,080

Electronic Government Fund.........................................  ...............          33,000           35,000          +35,000           +2,000
Allowances and Office Staff for Former Presidents..................           2,934            3,756            3,756             +822   ...............
Expenses, Presidential transition..................................           8,520   ...............  ...............          -8,520   ...............
Federal Citizen Services Fund......................................          36,096           36,515           36,515             +419   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, General Services Administration.......................       6,434,170          644,442          598,262       -5,835,908          -46,180
          Non-emergency............................................        (577,170)        (644,442)        (598,262)        (+21,092)        (-46,180)
          Emergency................................................      (5,857,000)  ...............  ...............     (-5,857,000)  ...............

Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation..............................             500   ...............             660             +160             +660

                   Merit Systems Protection Board

Salaries and expenses..............................................          38,811           40,339           40,339           +1,528   ...............
Limitation on administrative expenses..............................           2,579            2,579            2,579   ...............  ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Merit Systems Protection Board........................          41,390           42,918           42,918           +1,528   ...............

                     Morris K. Udall Foundation
Morris K. Udall Trust Fund.........................................           3,750            2,200            3,850             +100           +1,650
Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund..............................           2,100            3,800            3,000             +900             -800
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Morris K. Udall Foundation............................           5,850            6,000            6,850           +1,000             +850

            National Archives and Records Administration

Operating expenses.................................................         330,308          339,770          339,770           +9,462   ...............
    Reduction of debt..............................................         -11,842          -13,000          -13,000           -1,158   ...............
Office of the Inspector General....................................  ...............           4,100            4,100           +4,100   ...............
Electronic records archive.........................................          67,008           85,500           85,500          +18,492   ...............
Repairs and restoration............................................          50,711           27,500           27,500          -23,211   ...............
National Historical Publications and Records Commission: Grants              11,250           10,000           12,000             +750           +2,000
 program...........................................................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Archives and Records Administration..........         447,435          453,870          455,870           +8,435           +2,000

                National Credit Union Administration

Central liquidity facility:
    (Limitation on admin expenses, corporate funds)................          (1,250)          (1,250)          (1,250)  ...............  ...............
Community development credit union revolving loan fund.............           1,000            1,000            1,000   ...............  ...............
Office of Government Ethics........................................          13,000           13,665           13,665             +665   ...............

                   Office of Personnel Management

Salaries and expenses..............................................          92,829           94,970           94,970           +2,141   ...............
    Limitation on administrative expenses..........................         118,082          113,238          112,738           -5,344             -500
Office of Inspector General........................................           1,828            2,136            2,136             +308   ...............
    Limitation on administrative expenses..........................          18,755           20,428           20,428           +1,673   ...............
Govt Payment for Annuitants, Employees Health Benefits.............       9,533,000        9,814,000        9,814,000         +281,000   ...............
Govt Payment for Annuitants, Employee Life Insurance...............          46,000           48,000           48,000           +2,000   ...............
Payment to Civil Svc Retirement and Disability Fund................      10,550,000       10,276,000       10,276,000         -274,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of Personnel Management........................      20,360,494       20,368,772       20,368,272           +7,778             -500
          Mandatory................................................     (20,129,000)     (20,138,000)     (20,138,000)         (+9,000)  ...............
          Discretionary............................................        (231,494)        (230,772)        (230,272)         (-1,222)           (-500)

Office of Special Counsel..........................................          17,468           18,495           18,495           +1,027   ...............
Postal Regulatory Commission.......................................          14,043           14,333           14,333             +290   ...............
Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board........................           1,500            2,000            1,500   ...............            -500
Recovery Act Accountability and Transparency Board (emergency                84,000   ...............  ...............         -84,000   ...............
 appropriations Public Law 111-5)..................................

                 Securities and Exchange Commission

Salaries and expenses..............................................         960,000        1,026,000        1,126,000         +166,000         +100,000
Prior year unobligated balances....................................         -65,644          -10,220          -10,220          +55,424   ...............
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-32)...................          10,000   ...............  ...............         -10,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Direct appropriation.........................................         904,356        1,015,780        1,115,780         +211,424         +100,000

Selective Service System...........................................          22,000           24,400           24,400           +2,400   ...............

                   Small Business Administration

Salaries and expenses..............................................         386,896          422,000          444,000          +57,104          +22,000
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5)....................          69,000   ...............  ...............         -69,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................         455,896          422,000          444,000          -11,896          +22,000

Office of Inspector General........................................          16,750           16,300           16,300             -450   ...............
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5)....................          10,000   ...............  ...............         -10,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................          26,750           16,300           16,300          -10,450   ...............

Surety bond guarantees revolving fund..............................           2,000            1,000            1,000           -1,000   ...............
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5)....................          15,000   ...............  ...............         -15,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................          17,000            1,000            1,000          -16,000   ...............

Business Loans Program Account:
    Direct loans subsidy...........................................           2,500            3,000            3,000             +500   ...............
        Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5)................           6,000   ...............  ...............          -6,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal.................................................           8,500            3,000            3,000           -5,500   ...............

    Guaranteed loans subsidy.......................................  ...............          80,000           80,000          +80,000   ...............
        Emergency appropriations (Public Law 111-5)................         630,000   ...............  ...............        -630,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal.................................................         630,000           80,000           80,000         -550,000   ...............

    Administrative expenses........................................         138,480          153,000          153,000          +14,520   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Business loans program account........................         776,980          236,000          236,000         -540,980   ...............

          Non-emergency............................................        (140,980)        (236,000)        (236,000)        (+95,020)  ...............
          Emergency................................................        (636,000)  ...............  ...............       (-636,000)  ...............

Disaster Loans Program Account:
    Guaranteed loans subsidy.......................................  ...............           1,690            1,690           +1,690   ...............
    Administrative expenses........................................  ...............         102,310          102,310         +102,310   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Disaster loans program account........................  ...............         104,000          104,000         +104,000   ...............

Sec. 525. Salaries and expenses....................................          65,654   ...............          59,604           -6,050          +59,604
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Small Business Administration.........................       1,342,280          779,300          860,904         -481,376          +81,604
          Non-emergency............................................        (612,280)        (779,300)        (860,904)       (+248,624)        (+81,604)
          Emergency................................................        (730,000)  ...............  ...............       (-730,000)  ...............

                    United States Postal Service

Payment to the Postal Service Fund.................................          29,000           29,000           29,000   ...............  ...............
    Advance appropriations.........................................          82,831           89,328           89,328           +6,497   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Payment to the Postal Service Fund....................         111,831          118,328          118,328           +6,497   ...............

Office of Inspector General........................................         239,356          244,397          244,397           +5,041   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, United States Postal Service..........................         351,187          362,725          362,725          +11,538   ...............

United States Tax Court............................................          48,463           49,241           49,241             +778   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Total, title V, Independent Agencies.........................      30,631,491       24,391,669       24,555,978       -6,075,513         +164,309
          Appropriations...........................................     (23,859,660)     (24,302,341)     (24,466,650)       (+606,990)       (+164,309)
          Emergency appropriations.................................      (6,689,000)  ...............  ...............     (-6,689,000)  ...............
          Advances.................................................         (82,831)         (89,328)         (89,328)         (+6,497)  ...............
          (by transfer)............................................         (52,975)         (37,942)         (37,942)        (-15,033)  ...............
      (Mandatory)..................................................     (20,129,000)     (20,138,000)     (20,138,000)         (+9,000)  ...............
      (Discretionary less emergencies).............................      (3,813,491)      (4,253,669)      (4,417,978)       (+604,487)       (+164,309)
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Grand total..................................................      51,470,576       46,439,230       46,479,193       -4,991,383          +39,963
          Appropriations...........................................     (44,528,809)     (46,399,902)     (46,439,865)     (+1,911,056)        (+39,963)
          Rescissions..............................................        (-30,000)        (-50,000)        (-50,000)        (-20,000)  ...............
          Emergency appropriations.................................      (6,888,936)  ...............  ...............     (-6,888,936)  ...............
          Advances.................................................         (82,831)         (89,328)         (89,328)         (+6,497)  ...............
          (by transfer)............................................         (52,975)        (117,942)        (117,942)        (+64,967)  ...............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



