TITLE:  , B-289380, July 31, 2002
BNUMBER:  B-289380
DATE:  July 31, 2002
**********************************************************************
, B-289380, July 31, 2002

    
B-289380
    
    
    
July 31, 2002
    
Mr. Michael S. Solender
General Counsel
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
Washington, D.C. 20207-0001

    
Subject:  Independent Statutory Authority of Consumer Product Safety
Commission
    to Enter Into Interagency Agreements
    
    
Dear Mr. Solender:
    
You asked for our opinion on whether section 27(g) of the Consumer Product
Safety Act, codified at 15 U.S.C. S: 2076(g), provides the Consumer
Product Safety Commission (Commission) with statutory authority to enter
into agreements with other federal agencies independent of the Economy
Act, 31 U.S.C. S: 1535.  Such independent authority would permit the
Commission to avoid the deobligation requirement applicable to Economy Act
transactions.  Based on the plain meaning of section 27(g), as confirmed
by the legislative history of the Consumer Product Safety Act, we conclude
that the Commission has independent statutory authority to enter into
interagency agreements for activities authorized by the Act and these
agreements are not subject to the deobligation requirement applicable to
Economy Act transactions. 
    
ANALYSIS
    
Unless otherwise authorized by law, transfers of funds between federal
government agencies and instrumentalities are prohibited by law.  31
U.S.C. S: 1532.  The Economy Act, 31 U.S.C. S: 1535, authorizes an agency
to provide goods or services to another agency on a reimbursable payment
basis.  70 Comp. Gen. 592, 595 (1991).  The Economy Act was created to
*permit the utilization of the materials, supplies, facilities, and
personnel belonging to one department by another department or independent
establishment which is not equipped to furnish the materials, work, or
services for itself, and to provide a uniform procedure so far as
practical for all departments.*  57 Comp. Gen. 675, 678-80 (1978).  See
also, H.R. Rep. No. 72-1126, at 15-16 (1932).    
    
The Economy Act requires that when an agency enters into an agreement with
another federal agency, the ordering agency must obligate the
appropriation from which it will reimburse the performing agency.  31
U.S.C. S: 1535(d).  If the appropriation charged is a fiscal year
appropriation, the Economy Act requires the ordering agency to deobligate
the appropriation at the end of the fiscal year charged to the extent that
the performing agency has not performed or incurred valid obligations
under the agreement.  Id.  See, e.g., 39 Comp. Gen. 317 (1959); 34 Comp.
Gen. 418, 421-22 (1955). 
    
Where an interagency agreement is based on specific statutory authority
other than the Economy Act, an agency is not required to deobligate funds
at the end of the period of availability.  See, e.g., B-282601, Sept. 27,
1999 (section 1535(d) only applies to interagency agreements under the
Economy Act); B-167790, Sept. 22, 1977 (agreement is authorized by
statutory provisions other than Economy Act and is therefore not subject
to unique obligation treatment applicable Economy Act transactions). 
However, an ordering agency may obligate a time limited appropriation only
to meet a legitimate, or bona fide, need of the fiscal year in which the
appropriation is made.  B-282601, Sept. 27, 1999.  Generally, funds may be
obligated for the provision of services beyond the fiscal year in which
the appropriation is made only to the extent a bona fide need exists and
the services constitute a single nonseverable undertaking.  Id. 
    
Section 27(g) of the Consumer Product Safety Act provides that:  *The
Commission is authorized to enter into contracts with governmental
entities, private organizations, or individuals for the conduct of
activity authorized by this chapter.*  15 U.S.C.
S: 2076(g).  The place to begin to determine whether section 27(g)
authorizes the Commission to enter into agreements with other federal
agencies is with the language of the statute itself.  *Absent a clearly
expressed legislative intention to the contrary, the language must
ordinarily be regarded as conclusive.*  Consumer Prod. Safety Comm'n v.
GTE Sylvania, 447 U.S. 102, 108 (1980).  Section 27(g) clearly gives
independent contractual authority to the Commission to make contracts with
governmental entities, private organizations, or individuals.  The only
issue is whether *governmental entities* includes federal entities.  Based
on the common, ordinary meaning of *governmental* and the absence of any
other language in the statute to limit the scope of the word, we believe
it is reasonable to read *governmental* to include federal entities.     
    
This view is supported by the legislative history of the Consumer Product
Safety Act.  Cf. United States v. Howard, 352 U.S. 212, 218 (1957)
(Supreme Court used legislative history to support the most reasonable
interpretation).  Both the Senate and the House bills would have
authorized the Commission to enter into contracts with public agencies. 
The Senate version included explicit language referring to any agency of
the United States government.  The Senate passed bill stated:  
    
(c) POWERS. * In order to fulfill his duties under this title, the
Administrator is empowered to *
    
(8) enter into and perform such contracts, leases, cooperative agreements,
or other transactions as may be necessary in the conduct of the work of
the Agency and on such terms as the Administrator may deem appropriate,
with any agency or instrumentality of the United States, or with any
State, territory, or possession, or any political subdivision thereof, or
with any public or private person, firm, association, corporation,
independent testing laboratory, or institution.
    
S. 3419, 92d Cong. S: 104 (1972) (emphasis added).  The House bill was
more succinct and contained the same language that appears in section
27(g) of the enacted legislation.  H.R. Rep. No. 92-1153 (1972).  The
conference report accompanying the Consumer Product Safety Act shows that
the conferees understood both bills to permit the Commission to contract
with other federal agencies, notwithstanding the different language used
in the two bills.  The conference report stated that the Senate bill
authorized the Commission to *enter into contracts and other arrangements
with other public agencies or with any person.*  H.R. Conf. Rep. No.
92-1593, at 4626 (1972).  The conference report summarized the House
provision as authorizing the Commission to *enter into contracts with
public agencies or any person.* Id.  Although the conferees adopted the
language in the House bill, it is clear that the conferees understood that
language to permit the Commission to contract with any agency or
instrumentality of the United States.
    
In another provision of the same law, the Congress also used the word
*governmental,* and defined it in a manner consistent with our
interpretation of its use in section 27.  Section 28 of the Consumer
Product Safety Act, Pub. L. No. 92-573, 86 Stat. 1230 (1972), which was
repealed in 1981, provided for the establishment and membership of the
Product Safety Advisory Council.  The Act stated that *The Council shall
be constituted as follows:  (1) five members shall be selected from
governmental agencies including Federal, State, and local governments **
    Pub. L. No. 92-573, S: 28(a), 86 Stat. 1230 (1972) (emphasis added),
repealed by Pub. L. No. 97-35, Title XII, S: 1205(a)(1), 95 Stat. 716
(1981).  This section supports the view that Congress viewed
*governmental* as including federal agencies when it enacted the Consumer
Product Safety Act.
    

                                   CONCLUSION

    
Based on the plain meaning of the language in section 27(g), as confirmed
by the legislative history of the Consumer Product Safety Act, we conclude
that the Commission has independent statutory authority to enter into
agreements with other federal agencies for any purpose authorized by the
Consumer Product Safety Act.  Consequently, these agreements are not
subject to the deobligation requirement applicable to Economy Act
transactions; however, the Commission may obligate a time limited
appropriation only to meet a bona fide need of the fiscal year in which
the appropriation is made.
    
We hope this responds to your request.  Should you have any questions,
please contact Susan A. Poling, Managing Associate General Counsel, at
202-512-2667.
    
Sincerely yours,
    
    
/signed/
    
Anthony H.  Gamboa
General Counsel
    
DIGEST
    
Section 27(g) of the Consumer Product Safety Act, codified at 15 U.S.C. S:
2076(g), provides the Consumer Product Safety Commission with independent
statutory authority to enter into agreements with other federal agencies
and these agreements are not subject to the deobligation requirement
applicable to Economy Act transactions.