[Senate Report 117-22]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 56
117th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 117-22
_______________________________________________________________________
BILLION DOLLAR BOONDOGGLE
ACT OF 2021
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
to accompany
S. 636
TO REQUIRE THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF
MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET TO SUBMIT TO CONGRESS AN
ANNUAL REPORT ON PROJECTS THAT ARE OVER BUDGET
AND BEHIND SCHEDULE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
May 10, 2021.--Ordered to be printed
________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2021
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan, Chairman
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona RAND PAUL, Kentucky
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
ALEX PADILLA, California MITT ROMNEY, Utah
JON OSSOFF, Georgia RICK SCOTT, Florida
JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
David M. Weinberg, Staff Director
Zachary I. Schram, Chief Counsel
Lena C. Chang, Director of Governmental Affairs
Yelena L. Tsilker, Professional Staff Member
Pamela Thiessen, Minority Staff Director
Andrew C. Dockham, Minority Chief Counsel and Deputy Staff Director
Jeremy H. Hayes, Minority Senior Professional Staff Member
Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
Calendar No. 56
117th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 117-22
======================================================================
BILLION DOLLAR BOONDOGGLE ACT OF 2021
_______
May 10, 2021.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Peters, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 636]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, to which was referred the bill (S. 636) to require the
Director of the Office of Management and Budget to submit to
Congress an annual report on projects that are over budget and
behind schedule, and for other purposes, having considered the
same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment and
recommends that the bill, as amended, 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 of the Bill, as Reported............3
V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact.................................3
VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate.......................4
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported...........5
I. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
S. 636, the Billion Dollar Boondoggle Act of 2021, requires
Federal agencies to include in one of several relevant annual
reports to Congress a list of all projects that are $1 billion
or more over budget or five years or more behind schedule. The
purpose of this bill is to increase oversight with respect to
projects that are over budget and behind schedule.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\On March 2, 2020, the Committee approved S. 565, the Billion
Dollar Boondoggle Act of 2019, which is substantially similar to S.
636.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. BACKGROUND AND THE NEED FOR LEGISLATION
It is the responsibility of Congress to oversee the use of
taxpayer dollars, and greater transparency strengthens the
ability of Congress to reduce unnecessary costs.
On May 21, 2019, Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA), Senator Ron
Johnson (R-WI), and Senator Gary Peters (D-MI) sent letters to
the ten Federal agencies with the highest annual spending on
contracts to gather information about projects that are $1
billion or more over budget or five years or more behind
schedule.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\Letter from Joni Ernst, Senator, Ron Johnson, Chairman, Senate
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and Gary
Peters, Ranking Member, to the Department of Justice, Department of
Health and Human Services, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Department of Transportation, Department of Homeland
Security, Department of Agriculture, Department of Energy, Department
of State, Department of Defense, and Department of Veterans Affairs
(May 21, 2019) (on file with the Committee).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In their responses, agencies discussed a number of projects
that are severely over budget or behind schedule. The list
included computer systems funded by the Department of Homeland
Security, new aircraft and weapons systems funded by the
Department of Defense, clean-up projects funded by the
Department of Energy, and renovation projects funded by the
Department of Veterans Affairs, among others.\3\ In at least
one case, a Department of Transportation project to establish a
new bullet train, which was estimated to be more than $1
billion over budget and 13 years behind schedule, was cancelled
in May 2019.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\Responses on file with Committee staff.
\4\U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad
Administration, Statement of Federal Railroad Administration on
Termination of FY `10 Grant Agreement with California High-Speed Rail
Authority (May 16, 2019) (https://railroads.dot.gov/newsroom/statement-
federal-railroad-administration-termination-fy-%E2%80%9810-grant-
agreement-california) (accessed Apr. 20, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not all projects meeting these requirements should be
discontinued. For instance, there could have been funding
delays, miscalculations or unforeseen challenges arising for an
innovative project, or even expansions to a project to meet
emerging needs. However, if a project is missing deadlines or
costing significantly more than originally estimated, Congress
should be updated so the members can assess if mismanagement or
fraud is taking place. Congress may also respond by passing
legislation to address the underlying causes of the cost
overruns and delays.
The Nunn-McCurdy Act, included as part of the Department of
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1983, required the
Department of Defense (DOD) to report to Congress whenever a
Major Defense Acquisition Program (MDAP) experiences
significant cost overruns.\5\ There were 37 such cases reported
to Congress between 2007 and 2015.\6\ The Congressional
Research Service (CRS) noted, ``As a result of the Nunn-McCurdy
process, Congress has substantial visibility into the cost
performance of the acquisition stage of MDAPs that experience
certain levels of cost growth. To the extent that Nunn-McCurdy
increases visibility into--and an understanding of what
causes--cost growth, the act can help efforts to improve weapon
system acquisitions.''\7\ CRS further noted that, while
uncommon, in a few cases Nunn-McCurdy reports have resulted in
a program being cancelled.\8\ That cost transparency principle
is equally important for other executive and independent
agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Department of Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1983,
Pub. L. No. 97 252 (1982), codified at 10 U.S.C. Sec. 2433 (1982).
\6\Congressional Research Service, The Nunn-McCurdy Act:
Background, Analysis, and Issues for Congress (R41293) (May 12, 2016).
\7\Id.
\8\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Billion Dollar Boondoggle Act of 2021, as amended,
requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to issue
guidance requiring Federal agencies to annually report a list
of all projects that are $1 billion or more over their original
budget or five years or more behind schedule, including
information on each contractor, subcontractor, grantee, and
subgrantee involved. Additionally, this bill specifies that the
term ``project'' refers to time-limited endeavors, such as
major acquisitions or clean-up efforts, and does not include
mandatory spending. This bill allows agencies to include the
requested information in one of several relevant annual reports
in lieu of publishing a separate report to Congress. With the
requirement to report to Congress, agencies will more easily
identify projects that are severely over budget or behind
schedule. Therefore, both Congress and agencies will be better
suited to manage taxpayer dollars.
III. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA) introduced S. 636, the Billion
Dollar Boondoggle Act of 2021, on March 9, 2021, with Chairman
Gary Peters (D-MI) and Senator Mike Braun (R-IN). The bill was
referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs. Senator Rick Scott (R-FL), Senator James Lankford (R-
OK), Senator Margaret Hassan (D-NH), and Senator Marsha
Blackburn (R-TN) later joined as cosponsors.
The Committee considered S. 636 at a business meeting on
March 17, 2021. During the business meeting, an amendment was
offered by Chairman Peters and adopted en bloc by voice vote.
The bill, as amended, was ordered reported favorably by voice
vote en bloc. Senators Peters, Rosen, Padilla, Portman,
Johnson, Lankford, Romney, Scott and Hawley were present for
the vote.
IV. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE BILL, AS REPORTED
Section 1. Short title
This section establishes the short title of the bill as the
``Billion Dollar Boondoggle Act of 2021.''
Section 2. Annual report
This section requires the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget to provide guidance to agencies for
reporting annually on projects that are more than five years
behind schedule or more than $1 billion over their original
budget. The section defines the terms ``covered agency,''
``covered project,'' and ``project.'' The section further
specifies the annual reporting requirements, including a brief
description of the covered project and other required
information.
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 Committee agrees with the Congressional
Budget Office's statement that the bill contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no costs
on state, local, or tribal governments.
VI. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, April 5, 2021.
Hon. Gary C. Peters,
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. 636, the Billion
Dollar Boondoggle Act of 2021.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew
Pickford.
Sincerely,
Phillip L. Swagel,
Director.
Enclosure.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
S. 636 would require agencies to report on any government
project that is $1 billion or more over budget or more than
five years behind schedule. The report would include a
description of the project, any changes to the project's
requirements, the original due date and expected completion
date, and some financial information. The bill also would
require the Office of Management and Budget to issue guidance
on the reporting requirements. Because the information is
already available for those projects, CBO estimates that
implementing S. 636 would have no significant effect on the
federal budget.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Matthew
Pickford. The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss,
Deputy Director of Budget Analysis.
VII. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
Because this legislation would not repeal or amend any
provision of current law, it would not make changes in existing
law within the meaning of clauses (a) and (b) of paragraph 12
of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate.
[all]