[Senate Report 114-110]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                     Calendar No. 190
114th Congress      }                                   {      Report
                                 SENATE
                                                                 
 1st Session        }                                   {     114-110

_______________________________________________________________________

                                                


     DC COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER SUPERVISION AGENCY ACT OF 2015

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                   COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND

                          GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                              to accompany

                                S. 1629

            TO REVISE CERTAIN AUTHORITIES OF THE DISTRICT OF
            COLUMBIA COURTS, THE COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER
          SUPERVISION AGENCY FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, AND
THE PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, AND FOR OTHER 
                                PURPOSES

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                 August 3, 2015.--Ordered to be printed
                 
                                 ______

                         U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 

49-010                         WASHINGTON : 2015                  
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
        COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                    RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin, Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona                 THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio                    CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri
RAND PAUL, Kentucky                  JON TESTER, Montana
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma             TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming             HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire          CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey
JONI ERNST, Iowa                     GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
BEN SASSE, Nebraska

                    Keith B. Ashdown, Staff Director
                  Christopher R. Hixon, Chief Counsel
       Patrick J. Bailey, Chief Counsel for Governmental Affairs
Gabrielle D'Adamo Singer, Deputy Chief Counsel for Governmental Affairs
              Gabrielle A. Batkin, Minority Staff Director
           John P. Kilvington, Minority Deputy Staff Director
               Mary Beth Schultz, Minority Chief Counsel
                     Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                                                     Calendar No. 190
114th Congress      }                                   {      Report
                                 SENATE
                                                                 
 1st Session        }                                   {     114-110

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



 
     DC COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER SUPERVISION AGENCY ACT OF 2015

                                _______
                                

                 August 3, 2015.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 1629]

    The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs, to which was referred the bill (S. 1629) to revise 
certain authorities of the District of Columbia courts, the 
Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District 
of Columbia, and the Public Defender Service for the District 
of Columbia, and for other purposes, having considered the 
same, reports favorably thereon without amendment and 
recommends that the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
  I. Purpose and Summary..............................................1
 II. Background and Need for the Legislation..........................2
III. Legislative History..............................................3
 IV. Section-by-Section Analysis......................................3
  V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact..................................4
 VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................4
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............5

                         I. Purpose and Summary

    S. 1629, the District of Columbia (DC or the District) 
Courts, Public Defender Service, and Court Services and 
Offender Supervision Agency Act of 2015, seeks to provide the 
judicial offices of the District of Columbia with increased 
authority to make personnel, managerial, and programmatic 
decisions, including authority to improve the reentry programs 
of the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency by 
allowing the agency to offer programmatic incentives to 
sentenced offenders; authority to collect debts and erroneous 
payments from DC Courts employees; authority for the DC Public 
Defender Service to accept volunteer services; and related 
provisions.

              II. Background and the Need for Legislation

    In 1997, Congress reorganized the District of Columbia 
judicial agencies and turned them into federal agencies with 
federal employees.\1\ However, while federalizing these local 
agencies, Congress did not provide basic authorities that are 
available to other federal agencies and are necessary to the 
efficient operation of the judicial branch of the local 
District government.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement 
Act of 1997, Pub. L. No. 105-33.
    \2\For example, while 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5901 provides authorization for 
appropriations for uniforms for all federal agencies ``and the 
government of the District of Columbia,'' that law was explicitly 
superceded by the D.C. Code Sec. 1-632.02(a)(5)(I). Furthermore, the 
D.C. City Council has no authority to authorize the purchase of 
uniforms based on the strict limitation under D.C. Code Sec. 1-
206.02(a)(4), which prevents the council from enacting any measure 
related to the courts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For example, the Court Services and Offender Supervision 
Agency has specific statutory authority to punish sentenced 
offenders but lacks statutory authority to improve reentry 
programs by offering incentives to those sentenced offenders 
who succeed.\3\ A growing body of research indicates that not 
only should supervision services provide incentive programs, 
they should be offering more opportunities for incentives than 
for sanctions.\4\ With the authority provided under this bill, 
the agency could provide simple, low cost items to former 
offenders such as bus fares to job interviews and fees for GED 
tests if those offenders are doing particularly well in the 
reentry program. These incentives would be paid for out of the 
agency's general operating fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement 
Act of 1997, Pub. L. No. 105-33.
    \4\American Probation and Parole Association, Effective Responses 
to Offender Behavior: Lessons Learned for Probation and Parole 
Supervision, available at https://www.appa-net.org/eWeb/docs/APPA/pubs/
EROBLLPPS-Report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The District's Public Defender Service also lacks authority 
to accept volunteer services. Without this authority, the 
agency cannot accept pro bono legal services from local law 
firms or unpaid legal interns and law clerks, which also 
hampers entry-level attorney recruitment, according to the 
agency.\5\ S. 1629 gives the Public Defender Services the 
authority to accept donations and volunteer services while also 
recognizing that its board members are employees of the 
District.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement 
Act of 1997, Pub. L. No. 105-33.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Finally, the District of Columbia Courts lack the basic 
authority to collect overpayments to their own employees by 
offsetting pay.\6\ If a simple payroll error occurs, the courts 
can ask the employee to repay and can proceed using common law 
legal methods to collect, but have no authority to simply and 
efficiently offset the employee's pay. The courts also lack the 
authority to purchase uniforms for employees.\7\ S. 1629 would 
provide the District of Columbia Courts with the authorities it 
needs to operate efficiently by authorizing the District of 
Columbia Courts to purchase uniforms for certain employees and 
collect overpayments and other debts owed by employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\The Comptroller General has held that specific statutory 
authority is necessary for a federal agency to offset an employee's 
pay. See 61 Comp. Gen. 450 (1982). While this specific authority has 
been granted to all federal agencies and to other agencies of the 
government of the District of Columbia, see 5 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 5514 and 
5584; 31 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 3711 and 3716; D.C. Code Sec. Sec. 1-629.01--
1-629.04, and D.C. Code Sec. 2-406, it is not available to the Courts.
    \7\See, D.C. Code Sec. 1-632.02(a)(5)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        III. Legislative History

    Senator Johnson introduced S. 1629 with Senator Carper on 
June 18, 2015. The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
    The Committee considered S. 1629 at a business meeting held 
on June 24, 2015. No amendments were offered. The Committee 
ordered the bill reported favorably en bloc by voice vote. 
Members present for the vote were: Johnson, McCain, Lankford, 
Ayotte, Ernst, Sasse, Carper, Tester, Baldwin, and Heitkamp.

        IV. Section-by-Section Analysis of the Bill, as Reported


Section 1. Short title

    This section provides the bill's short title, the 
``District of Columbia Courts, Public Defender Service, and 
Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency Act of 2015.''

Section 2. Authorities of District of Columbia Courts

    This section authorizes the District of Columbia Courts to 
collect overpayments and outstanding employee debts by 
offsetting pay. It furthermore establishes the timing and 
guidelines for the recovery of such overpayments.
    This section also allows the District of Columbia Courts to 
provide uniforms for employees whose responsibilities warrant 
the wearing of uniforms.

Section 3. Authorities of Court Services and Offender Supervision 
        Agency

    This section authorizes the Court Services and Offender 
Supervision Agency to offer programmatic incentives to 
sentenced offenders.
    It also makes permanent the authority of the agency to 
accept and solicit monetary and nonmonetary gifts and to accept 
and use reimbursements from the District of Columbia.

Section 4. Authorities of Public Defender Service

    This section authorizes the Public Defender Service to 
accept and use volunteer services, public grants, and private 
donations.
    It also clarifies that members of the Board of Trustees for 
the Public Defender Services are employees of the Public 
Defender Service.

                   V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact

    Pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 11(b) of rule 
XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has 
considered the regulatory impact of this bill and determined 
that the bill will have no regulatory impact within the meaning 
of the rules. The Congressional Budget Office confirmed that S. 
1629 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates 
as defined in UMRA.

             VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate 

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                      Washington, DC, July 2, 2015.
Hon. Ron Johnson ,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. 
        Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1629, the District 
of Columbia Courts, Public Defender Service, and Court Services 
and Offender Supervision Agency Act of 2015.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew 
Pickford.
            Sincerely,
                                                        Keith Hall.
    Enclosure.

S. 1629--District of Columbia Courts, Public Defender Service, and 
        Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency Act of 2015

    S. 1629 would make changes to the District of Columbia 
Official Code that governs the D.C. Courts system. Under 
current law, the budget of the D.C. Courts system, including 
the Public Defender Service (PDS) and the Court Services and 
Offender Service Agency (CSOSA), is funded by federal 
appropriations; thus, its expenditures are recorded in the 
federal budget. Among other changes, the bill would allow the 
D.C. Courts System to collect debts and erroneous payments owed 
by its employees and to purchase uniforms for non-judicial 
employees. The bill also would allow CSOSA to operate incentive 
programs for offender education, accept and spend gifts, and 
receive reimbursement from the D.C. government for the use of 
office space in D.C. Courts facilities. Finally, the bill would 
allow PDS to use unpaid volunteers. Based on information 
provided by the District of Columbia Courts, PDS, and CSOSA, 
CBO estimates that the proposed changes would have an 
insignificant effect on discretionary spending.
    Enacting the legislation would affect direct spending 
because it would authorize CSOSA to accept and spend monetary 
gifts. Therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. However, CBO 
estimates that the net effect on direct spending would not be 
significant. Enacting S. 1629 would not affect revenues.
    S. 1629 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Matthew 
Pickford. This estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, 
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

      VII. Changes In Existing Law Made By The Bill, As Reported 

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by 
S. 1629 as reported are shown as follows (existing law proposed 
to be omitted is enclosed in brackets, new matter is printed in 
italic, and existing law in which no change is proposed is 
shown in roman):

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFICIAL CODE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE 2--GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



CHAPTER 16--PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SEC. 2--1603. BOARD OF TRUSTEES.

    (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (d) For the purposes of any action brought against the 
trustees of the Service, they shall be deemed to be [employees 
of the District of Columbia] employees of the Service.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 2--1607. APPROPRIATIONS; PUBLIC GRANTS AND PRIVATE CONTRIBUTIONS.

    (a) * * *
    (b) Upon approval of the Board of Trustees, [the Service 
may accept public grants and private contributions made to 
assist it] the Service may accept and use public grants, 
private contributions, and voluntary and uncompensated 
(gratuitous) services to assist it in carrying out the 
provisions of this chapter.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE 11--ORGANIZATION AND JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS 

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



CHAPTER 17--ADMINISTRATION OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS 

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Subchapter II--Courts Personnel 

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 11--1733. Collection, compromise, and waiver of employee debts and 
                    erroneous payments

    (a) Collection of Debts and Erroneous Payments Made to 
Employees.--
          (1) Authority to collect.--If the Executive Officer 
        determines that an employee or former employee of the 
        District of Columbia Courts is indebted to the District 
        of Columbia Courts because of an erroneous payment made 
        to or on behalf of the employee or former employee, or 
        any other debt, the Executive Officer may collect the 
        amount of the debt in accordance with this subsection.
          (2) Timing of collection.--The Executive Officer may 
        collect a debt from an employee under this subsection 
        in monthly installements or at officially established 
        regulat pay period intervals, by deduction in 
        reasonable amounts from the current pay of the 
        employee. 
          (3) Source of deductions.--The Executive Officer may 
        make a deduction under paragraph (2) from any wages, 
        salary, compensation, renumeration for services, or 
        other authorized pay, including incentive pay, back 
        pay, and lump sum leave payments, but not including 
        retirement pay. 
          (4) Limit on amount.--In making deductions under 
        paragraph (2) with respect to an employee, the 
        Executive Officer--
                  (A) except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
                may not deduct more than 20 percent of the 
                disposable pay of the employee for any period; 
                and
                  (B) upon consent of the employee, may deduct 
                more than 20 percent of the disposable pay of 
                the employee for any period. 
          (5) Collections after employment.--If the employement 
        of an employee ends before the Executive Officer 
        completes the collection of the amount of the 
        employee's debt under this subsection, deductions may 
        be made--
                  (A) from later non-periodic government 
                payments of any nature due the former employee, 
                except retirement pay; and
                  (B) without regard to the limit under 
                paragraph (4)(A).
    (b) Notice and Hearing Required.--
          (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (3), 
        prior to initiating any proceedings under subsection 
        (a) to collect any debt from an individual, the 
        Executive Officer shall provide the individual with--
                  (A) a written notice, not later than 30 days 
                before the date on which the Executive Officer 
                initiates the proceeding, that informs the 
                individual of--
                          (i) the nature and amount of the debt 
                        determined by the District of Columbia 
                        Courts to be due;
                          (ii) the intention of the Courts to 
                        initiate a proceeding to collect the 
                        debt through deductions from pay; and
                          (iii) an explanation of the rights of 
                        the individual under this section;
                  (B) an opportunity to inspect and copy Court 
                records relating to the debt;
                  (C) an opportunity to enter into a written 
                agreement with the Courts, under terms 
                agreeable to the Executive Officer, to 
                establish a schedule for the repayment of the 
                debt; and
                  (D) an opportunity for a hearing in 
                accordance with paragraph (2) on the 
                determination of the Courts--
                          (i) concerning the existence or the 
                        amount of the debt; and
                          (ii) in the case of an individual 
                        whose repayment schedule is established 
                        other than by a written agreement under 
                        subparagraph (C), concerning the terms 
                        of the repayment schedule.
          (2) Procedures for hearings.--
                  (A) Availability of hearing upon request.--
                Except as provided in paragraph (3), the 
                Executive Officer shall provide a hearing under 
                this paragraph if an individual, not later than 
                15 days after the date on which the individual 
                receives a notice under paragraph (1)(A), and 
                in accordance with any procedures that the 
                Executive Officer prescribes, files a petition 
                requesting the hearing.
                  (B) Basis for hearing.--A hearing under this 
                paragraph shall be on the written submissions 
                unless the hearing officer determines that the 
                existence or amount of the debt--
                          (i) turns on an issue of credibility 
                        or ceracity; or
                          (ii) cannot be resolved by a review 
                        of the documentary evidence.
                  (C) Stay of collection proceedings.--The 
                timely filing of a petition for hearing under 
                subparagraph (A) shall stay the commencement of 
                collection proceedings under this section.
                  (D) Independent officer.--An independent 
                hearing officer appointed in accordance with 
                regulations promulgated under subsection (e) 
                shall conduct a hearing under this paragraph.
                  (E) Deadline for decision.--The hearing 
                officer shall issue a final decision regarding 
                the questions covered by the hearing at the 
                earliest practicable date, and not later than 
                60 days after the date of the hearing.
          (3) Exception.--Paragraphs (1) and (2) shall not 
        apply to routine intra-Courts adjustment of pay that is 
        attributable to a clerical or administrative error or 
        delay in processing pay documents that occurred within 
        the 4 pay periods preceding the adjustment or to any 
        adjustment that amounts to not more than $50, if at the 
        time of the adjustment, or as soon thereafter as 
        practical, the Executive Officer provides the 
        individual--
                  (A) written notice of the nature and amount 
                of the adjustment; and
                  (B) a point of contact for contesting the 
                adjustment.
    (c) Compromise.--
          (1) Authority to compromise claims.--The Executive 
        Officer may--
                  (A) compromise a claim to collect an debt 
                under this section if the amount involved is 
                not more than $100,000; and
                  (B) suspend or end collection action on a 
                claim described in subparagraph (A) if the 
                Executive Officer determines that--
                          (i) no person liable on the claim has 
                        the present or prospective ability to 
                        pay a significant amount of the claim; 
                        or
                          (ii) the cost of collecting the claim 
                        is likely to be more than the amount 
                        recovered.
          (2) Effect of compromise.--A compromise under this 
        subsection shall be final and conclusive obtained by 
        fraud, misrepresentation, presenting a false claim, or 
        mutual mistake of fact.
          (3) No liability of official responsible for 
        compromise.--An accountable official shall not be 
        liable for an amount paid or for the value of property 
        lost or damaged if the amount or value is not recovered 
        because of a compromise under this subsection.
    (d) Waiver of Claim.--
          (1) Authority to waive claims.--Upon application from 
        a person liable on a claim to collect a debt under this 
        section, the Executive Officer may, with written 
        justification, waive the claim if collection would be--
                  (A) against equity;
                  (B) against good conscience; and
                  (C) not in the best interests of the District 
                of Columbia Courts.
          (2) Limitations on authority.--The Executive Officer 
        may not waive a claim under this subsection if the 
        Executive Officer--
                  (A) determines that there exists, in 
                connection with the claim, an indication of 
                fraud, misrepresentation, fault, or lack of 
                good faith on the part of the employee, the 
                former employee, or any other person that has 
                an interest in obtaining a waiver of the claim; 
                or
                  (B) receives the application for waiver later 
                than 3 years after the later of the date on 
                which the erroneous payment was discovered or 
                the date of enactment of this section, unless 
                the claim involves money owed for Federal 
                health benefits, Federal life insurance, or 
                Federal retirement benefits.
          (3) Denial of application for waiver.--A decision by 
        the Executive Officer to deny an application for a 
        waiver under this subsection shall be the final 
        administrative decision of the District government.
          (4) Refund of amounts already collected against claim 
        subsequently waived.--If the Executive Officer waives a 
        claim against an employee or former employee under this 
        section after the District of Columbia Courts have been 
        reimbursed for the claim in whole or in part, the 
        Executive Officer shall provide the employee or former 
        employee a refund of the amount of the reimbursement 
        upon application for the refund, if the Executive 
        Officer receives the application not later than 2 years 
        after the effective date of the waiver.
          (5) Effect on accounts of courts.--In the audit and 
        settlement of accounts of any accountable official, 
        full credit shall be given for any amounts with respect 
        to which collection by the District of Columbia Courts 
        is waived under this subsection.
          (6) Validity of payments.--An erroneous payment or 
        debt, the collection of which is waived under this 
        subsection, shall be a valid payment for all purposes.
          (7) No effect on other authorities.--Nothing 
        contained in this subsection shall be construed to 
        affect the authority of the District of Columbia under 
        any other statute to litigate, settle, compromise, or 
        waive any claim of the District of Columbia.
    (e) Regulations.--The authority of the Executive Officer 
under this section shall be subject to regulations promulgated 
by the Joint Committee.

Subchapter III--Duties and Responsibilities 

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SEC. 11--1742. PROPERTY AND DISBURSEMENT.

    (a) * * *
    (b) The Executive Officer shall be responsible for the 
procurement of necessary equipment, supplies, and services for 
the courts and shall have power, subject to applicable law, to 
reimburse the District of Columbia government for services 
provided and to contract for such equipment, supplies, and 
services as may be necessary. In carrying out the authority 
under the preceding sentence, the Executive Officer may 
purchase uniforms to be worn by nonjudicial employees of the 
District of Columbia Courts whose responsibilities warrant the 
wearing of uniforms if the cost of furnishing a uniform to an 
employee during a year does not exceed the amount applicable 
for the year under section 5901(a)(1) of title 5, United States 
Code (relating to the uniform allowance for employees of the 
Government of the United States).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


NATIONAL CAPITAL REVITALIZATION AND SELF-GOVERNMENT IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 
1997

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE XI--DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA REVITALIZATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Subtitle C--Criminal Justice 

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



CHAPTER 3--OFFENDER SUPERVISION AND PAROLE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SEC. 11233. COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER SUPERVISION AGENCY.

    (a) * * *
    (b) Director.--
          (1) * * *
          (2) Powers and duties of director.--The Director 
        shall--
                  (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  (F) develop and operate intermediate 
                [sanctions] sanctions and incentives;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (3) Acceptance of gifts.--
                  [(A) Authority to accept gifts.--During 
                fiscal years 2006 through 2008, the Director 
                may accept and use gifts in the form of--
                          [(i) in-kind contributions of space 
                        and hospitality to support offender and 
                        defendant programs; and
                          [(ii) equipment and vocational 
                        training services to educate and train 
                        offenders and defendants.]
                  (A) Authority to accept gifts.--The Director 
                may accept, solicit, and use on behalf of the 
                Agency any monetary or nonmonetary gift, 
                donation, bequest, or use of facilities, 
                property, or services for the purpose of aiding 
                or facilitating the work of the Agency.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (4) Reimbursement from district government.--[During 
        fiscal years 2006 through 2008, the Director] The 
        Director may accept and use reimbursement from the 
        District government for space and services provided, on 
        a cost reimbursable basis.

                                  [all]