Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
                                                       Calendar No. 186
104th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE

   1st Session                                                  104-142
_______________________________________________________________________


 
   AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 1996

                                _______


   September 14 (legislative day, September 5), 1995.--Ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________


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

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 1976]

    The Committee on Appropriations, to which was referred the 
bill (H.R. 1976) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural 
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies 
programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, and for 
other purposes, reports the same to the Senate with amendments 
and recommends that the bill as amended do pass.



Total obligational authority, fiscal year 1996

Amount of bill as passed by the House................... $62,579,232,000
Amount of change by Senate Committee....................   1,202,918,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
    Amount of bill as reported to Senate................  63,782,150,000
Amount of 1995 appropriations acts to date..............  68,944,300,000
Amount of estimates, 1996...............................  66,421,993,000
The bill as reported to the Senate:
    Under the appropriations provided in 1995...........   5,162,150,000
    Under the estimates for 1996........................   2,639,843,000
    Over the House bill.................................   1,202,918,000
                           breakdown by title

    The amounts of obligational authority for each of the six 
titles are shown in the following table. A detailed tabulation, 
showing comparisons, appears at the end of this report. 
Recommendations for individual appropriation items, projects 
and activities are carried in this report under the appropriate 
item headings.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         1996 Committee 
                                           1995          recommendation 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I: Agricultural programs....    $21,026,597,000    $16,076,006,000
Title II: Conservation programs...      2,645,871,000      2,695,646,000
Title III: Rural economic and                                           
 community development programs...      2,318,619,000      2,167,580,000
Title IV: Domestic food programs..     40,249,809,000     40,271,250,000
Title V: Foreign assistance and                                         
 related programs.................      1,712,819,000      1,627,542,000
Title VI: Related agencies........        990,585,000        944,126,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total, new budget                                                 
       (obligational) authority...     68,944,300,000     63,782,150,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

         compliance with section 308 of the budget control act

    Section 308(a) of the Budget Control Act (Public Law 93-
344) requires that this Committee include in its report 
specific budgetary information on the status of recommended 
appropriations relative to the First Concurrent Resolution. The 
following table provides these data:

                        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                                                         
 First Concurrent                                                       
 Resolution for                                                         
 1996: Subcommittee                                                     
 on Agriculture,                                                        
 Rural Development,                                                     
 and Related                                                            
 Agencies                                                               
    Defense                                                             
     discretionary..  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
    Nondefense                                                          
     discretionary..       13,310       13,310       13,608   \1\ 13,608
    Violent crime                                                       
     reduction fund.  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
    Mandatory.......       49,842       50,284       39,177       39,128
Projections of                                                          
 outlays associated                                                     
 with the                                                               
 recommendation:                                                        
    1996............  ...........  ...........  ...........   \2\ 45,910
    1997............  ...........  ...........  ...........        4,406
    1998............  ...........  ...........  ...........          846
    1999............  ...........  ...........  ...........          305
    2000 and future                                                     
     year...........  ...........  ...........  ...........          477
Financial assistance                                                    
 to State and local                                                     
 governments for                                                        
 1996 in bill.......           NA       14,420           NA       12,155
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.                  
\2\ Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.                  
                                                                        
NA: Not applicable.                                                     



                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                          Summary of the Bill

                                                                   Page
Overview and summary of the bill.................................     6

                     TITLE I--AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS
                 Production, Processing, and Marketing

Office of the Secretary..........................................     7
Executive operations.............................................     8
Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization...........    10
Office of the Chief Financial Officer............................    11
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration.............    11
Agriculture buildings and facilities and rental payments.........    12
Advisory committees, USDA........................................    13
Hazardous waste management.......................................    13
Departmental administration......................................    14
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations....    15
Office of Communications.........................................    16
Office of the Inspector General..................................    16
Office of the General Counsel....................................    17
Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and 
  Economics......................................................    17
Economic Research Service........................................    19
National Agricultural Statistics Service.........................    19
Agricultural Research Service....................................    20
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service.....    30
Office of Assistant Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory 
  Programs.......................................................    42
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.......................    43
Agricultural Marketing Service...................................    47
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration..........    50
Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety....................    51
Food Safety and Inspection Service...............................    51
Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural 
  Services.......................................................    52
Consolidated Farm Service Agency.................................    53

                              Corporations

Federal Crop Insurance Corporation...............................    59
Commodity Credit Corporation fund................................    60

                    TITLE II--CONSERVATION PROGRAMS

Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and 
  Environment....................................................    63
Natural Resources Conservation Service...........................    63
Consolidated Farm Service Agency.................................    71

      TITLE III--RURAL ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Economic and Community 
  Development....................................................    74
Rural Community Advancement Program..............................    75
Rural Housing and Community Development Service Programs.........    76
Rural Business and Cooperative Development Service...............    86
Rural Utilities Service..........................................   101

                    TITLE IV--DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS

Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer 
  Services.......................................................   102
Food and Consumer Service........................................   102

            TITLE V--FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS

Foreign Agricultural Service.....................................   117

                       TITLE VI--RELATED AGENCIES

Food and Drug Administration.....................................   124
Commodity Futures Trading Commission.............................   128
Farm Credit Administration.......................................   129

                     TITLE VII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

General provisions...............................................   130
Compliance with paragraph 7, rule XVI of the standing rules of 
  the Senate.....................................................   131
Compliance with paragraph 7(c), rule XXVI of the standing rules 
  of the Senate..................................................   133
Compliance with paragraph 12, rule XXVI of the standing rules of 
  the Senate.....................................................   134
                    OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL

    The Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug 
Administration, and Related Agencies appropriations bill 
provides funding for a wide array of Federal programs, mostly 
in the U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA]. These programs 
include agricultural research and extension activities, a 
variety of conservation programs, farm income and commodity 
price support programs, marketing and inspection activities, 
domestic food programs, rural economic and community 
development activities and electrification assistance, and 
various export and international activities of the USDA.
    The bill also provides funding for the Food and Drug 
Administration [FDA] and the Commodity Futures Trading 
Commission [CFTC], and allows the use of collected fees for 
administrative expenses of the Farm Credit Administration 
[FCA]. It also provides money to the Department of the Treasury 
for payments to the Farm Credit System Financial Assistance 
Corporation.
    Given the budgetary constraints that the Committee faces, 
the bill as reported provides the proper amount of emphasis on 
agricultural and rural development programs. It is within the 
subcommittee's 602(b) allocation.
    All accounts in the bill have been closely examined to 
ensure that an appropriate level of funding is provided to 
carry out the programs of USDA, FDA, CFTC, and FCA. Details on 
each of the accounts, the funding level, and the Committee's 
justifications behind the funding levels are included in the 
report.
    The Committee notes that it has not commented on many items 
included as House report language. However, some of these items 
may be revisited in a conference committee with the House.
    The Committee also has encouraged the consideration of 
grant and loan applications from various entities. The 
Committee expects the Department only to approve those 
applications judged meritorious when subjected to the 
established review process.
                     TITLE I--AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS

                 Production, Processing, and Marketing

                        Office of the Secretary

Appropriations, 1995....................................  \1\ $2,770,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................   \2\ 2,886,000
House allowance.........................................      10,227,000
Committee recommendation................................      12,801,000

\1\ Reflects enacted rescission of $31,000.
\2\ The 1996 budget proposed that the immediate Office of the Secretary 
be funded in a single account under the Office of the Secretary.

    The Secretary of Agriculture, assisted by the Deputy 
Secretary, Under Secretaries and Assistant Secretaries, Chief 
Financial Officer, and members of their immediate staffs, 
directs and coordinates the work of the Department. This 
includes developing policy, maintaining relationships with 
agricultural organizations and others in the development of 
farm programs, and maintaining liaison with the Executive 
Office of the President and Members of Congress on all matters 
pertaining to agricultural policy.
    The general authority of the Secretary to supervise and 
control the work of the Department is contained in the Organic 
Act (7 U.S.C. 2201-2202). The delegation of regulatory 
functions to Department employees and authorization of 
appropriations to carry out these functions is contained in 7 
U.S.C. 450c-450g.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the Secretary, the Committee recommends 
an appropriation of $12,801,000. This amount is $9,915,000 more 
than the budget request, $2,574,000 more than the House level, 
and $10,031,000 more than the 1995 appropriation. The Committee 
continues the practice of appropriating funds for the Under and 
Assistant Secretaries in separate accounts.
    The Committee concurs with the House provision that funding 
for InfoShare, the Department's project to integrate 
information systems and business processes to improve service 
delivery to customers of farm service and rural development 
agencies, be under the Secretary's direct guidance and control. 
The Committee provides $10,000,000 to the Office of the 
Secretary for InfoShare, to remain available until expended. 
This is $2,500,000 more than the House recommended level. The 
Committee notes that, in response to concerns raised by the 
Department's inspector general and the General Accounting 
Office [GAO], the program is undergoing a reevaluation. All 
projects, including the common access manager [CAM], have been 
put on hold and the program is being refocused on business 
process reengineering as a prerequisite to large-scale 
acquisitions of new technology. The Committee expects the 
Department to defer new technology acquisitions until business 
process reengineering is complete and other concerns raised 
about this project are satisfied. These include the need for a 
usable project management system to track project activities 
and a comprehensive budget tracking and accounting system to 
identify and report agency expenditures.
    The Committee is concerned that various current and 
proposed departmental initiatives for acquisition of hardware 
and software systems for the headquarters and field offices, 
including the National Finance Center and InfoShare, may 
perpetuate administrative redundancy and incompatibility among 
systems of the Department. The Committee expects all 
information systems activities to be coordinated through the 
Office of the Secretary.
    The Committee believes the Secretary should examine and, to 
the extent practicable, implement a Departmentwide information 
systems technology architecture. This will remove unnecessary 
firewalls between various departmental systems. It will ensure 
that the maintenance and reengineering of existing systems, as 
well as the development of new systems, is conducted in a 
shared environment which will eventually result in the complete 
interoperability of systems. It will minimize the redundancy 
and maximize the ability to reuse and maintain all information 
system components and ensure that departmental systems become 
portable among the different computer hardware and software 
technology platforms which the Department has today, or may 
need to acquire in the future as new technology becomes 
available.
    The Secretary should provide a report to the Committee by 
January 31, 1996, on steps taken to implement this 
architecture. Further, the Committee believes that all 
activities related to new as well as ongoing acquisitions 
should cease until this examination is complete.
    The Committee is aware of the realignment of management 
activities under the Department's reorganization. Under this 
plan, mission areas consolidated headquarters' management 
functions to provide more efficient administrative services in 
support of Department programs. The Committee expects that 
savings achieved through these efficiencies be applied to the 
greatest extent possible to reductions in funding required by 
this Act. In this regard, the Committee directs that a report 
be furnished to the Appropriations Committees by February 1, 
1996, detailing the level of reductions achieved by each agency 
through consolidation of administrative accounts in fiscal year 
1996. The report also should provide estimated planned savings 
through consolidated efficiencies in each future fiscal year 
through 2002.
    The Committee notes the growth in global information system 
[GIS] technologies and their application in the public sector. 
In order to better coordinate these activities, the Secretary 
is encouraged to work with the National Center for Resource 
Innovations [NCRI]-Southwest to pursue the possibility of a 
multiagency, multidisciplinary approach to better involve 
Federal, State, and local governments in developing uniform GIS 
applications.

                          Executive Operations

    Executive operations was established as a result of the 
reorganization of the Department to provide a support team for 
USDA policy officials and selected departmentwide services. 
Activities under the executive operations include the chief 
economist, the National Appeals Division, the Office of Budget 
and Program Analysis, and the Office of Small and Disadvantaged 
Business Utilization.

                     Office of the Chief Economist

Appropriations, 1995....................................         ( \1\ )
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      $4,240,000
House allowance.........................................       3,948,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,814,000

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, the Office of the Chief Economist and its functions were 
transferred to this account from the Office of the Assistant Secretary 
for Economics and from the Economic Research Service, National 
Agricultural Statistics Service, and World Agricultural Outlook Board. 
On a comparable basis, USDA estimates fiscal year 1995 appropriations of 
$3,814,000.

    The Office of the Chief Economist advises the Secretary of 
Agriculture on the economic implications of Department policies 
and programs. The Office serves as the single focal point for 
the Nation's economic intelligence and analysis, risk 
assessment, and cost-benefit analysis related to domestic and 
international food and agriculture, and is responsible for 
coordination and review of all commodity and aggregate 
agricultural and food-related data used to develop outlook and 
situation material within the Department.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the Chief Economist, the Committee 
recommends $3,814,000. This amount is $426,000 less than the 
budget request, $134,000 less than the House level, and 
$3,814,000 more than the 1995 appropriation.

                       National Appeals Division

Appropriations, 1995....................................         ( \1\ )
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     $12,166,000
House allowance.........................................      11,846,000
Committee recommendation................................      11,846,000

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, the National Appeals Division functions previously handled in the 
Rural Housing and Community Development Service, Consolidated Farm 
Service Agency, and Natural Resources Conservation Service were 
transferred to this account. On a comparable basis, USDA estimates 
fiscal year 1995 appropriations of $11,846,000.

    The National Appeals Division conducts administrative 
hearings and reviews of adverse program decisions made by the 
Consolidated Farm Service Agency, the Natural Resources 
Conservation Service, and the Rural Housing and Community 
Development Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the National Appeals Division, the Committee recommends 
$11,846,000. This amount is $320,000 less than the budget 
request, the same as the House level, and $11,846,000 more than 
the 1995 appropriation.

                 Office of Budget and Program Analysis

Appropriations, 1995....................................      $5,795,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................       5,899,000
House allowance.........................................       5,899,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               5,899,000

    The Office of Budget and Program Analysis provides 
direction and administration of the Department's budgetary 
functions including development, presentation, and execution of 
the budget; reviews program and legislative proposals for 
program, budget, and related implications; analyzes program and 
resource issues and alternatives, and prepares summaries of 
pertinent data to aid the Secretary and departmental policy 
officials and agency program managers in the decisionmaking 
process; provides departmentwide coordination for and 
participation in the presentation of budget-related matters to 
the committees of the Congress, the media, and interested 
public. The Office also provides departmentwide coordination of 
the preparation and processing of regulations and legislative 
programs and reports.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of Budget and Program Analysis, the 
Committee recommends $5,899,000. This amount is $104,000 more 
than the 1995 appropriation, and the same as the budget 
estimate and the House level.

         Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization

Appropriations, 1995....................................         ( \1\ )
Budget estimate, 1996...................................        $724,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization 
function was transferred from departmental administration to executive 
operations. On a comparable basis, USDA estimates fiscal year 1995 
appropriations of $707,000.

    The Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization 
oversees direction and implementation of sections 8 and 15 of 
the Small Business Act and oversees procurement to assure 
maximum participation of small and disadvantaged businesses in 
the Department's contracts for goods and services; and directs 
and monitors USDA agencies' compliance in promoting full and 
open competition in the Department's contracting process.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee concurs with the House in not providing a 
separate appropriation for the Office of Small and 
Disadvantaged Business Utilization. This amount is $724,000 
less than the budget request. The Committee includes the 1995 
level of funding of $707,000 for the functions of this Office 
in the departmental administration appropriation. This is the 
same as the House recommendation.

                 Office of the Chief Financial Officer

Appropriations, 1995 \1\................................        $580,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................       4,952,000
House allowance.........................................       4,133,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,133,000

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, funds appropriated for the Office of Finance and Management and 
the Office of the Chief Financial Officer are included. Funds 
appropriated for the safety and health management function are excluded. 
On a comparable basis, USDA estimates fiscal year 1995 appropriations of 
$4,133,000.

    Under the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, the Chief 
Financial Officer is responsible for the continued direction 
and oversight of the Department's financial management 
operations and systems. It is also responsible for the 
management and operation of the National Finance Center. The 
Office also provides budget, accounting, and fiscal services to 
the Office of the Secretary, departmental staff offices, Office 
of Communications, and executive operations.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, the 
Committee recommends $4,133,000. This amount is $819,000 less 
than the budget request, the same as the House level, and 
$3,553,000 more than the 1995 appropriation.
    The Committee retains House bill language to reinstate and 
market cross-servicing activities of the National Finance 
Center [NFC]. The Committee directs the USDA to actively market 
all available services at the NFC to other Federal agencies or 
entities for cross-servicing or franchising arrangements within 
the constraints of USDA and NFC capabilities, considering all 
demands for NFC services. Since such cross-servicing 
arrangements in the past have been documented to save millions 
of dollars, USDA is requested to work closely with prospective 
client agencies and the Office of Management and Budget to 
provide necessary full-time equivalents to the NFC to 
accomplish any workload expansions.
    The Committee strikes House bill language regarding 
contracting at the National Finance Center. The Committee 
recommends that the Department perform appropriate cost-benefit 
and risk analyses to evaluate the use of commercial off-the-
shelf financial management systems, in-house reengineering or 
modifications of existing systems, in-house development of new 
systems, and the use of outside contractors and consultants, or 
combinations of the above.

          Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration

Appropriations, 1995....................................        $596,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     \1\ 616,000
House allowance.........................................         596,000
Committee recommendation................................         596,000

\1\ The 1996 budget proposed that this office be funded in a single 
account under the Office of the Secretary.

    The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration 
directs and coordinates the work of the departmental staff in 
carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress relating to real 
and personal property management, automated data processing, 
personnel management, equal opportunity and civil rights 
programs, development and dissemination of departmental 
information resources management, and other general 
administrative functions. In addition, the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary for Administration is responsible for 
certain activities financed under the Department's working 
capital fund (7 U.S.C. 2235).

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Administration, the Committee recommends $596,000. This amount 
is $20,000 less than the budget request, and the same as the 
House and 1995 levels.

        Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments

Appropriations, 1995....................................    $135,193,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     135,774,000
House allowance.........................................     135,774,000

Committee recommendation

                                                             135,774,000

    Rental payments.--Annual appropriations are made to finance 
the appropriated portion of the payments to the General 
Services Administration [GSA] for rental of space and for 
related services to all USDA agencies, except the Forest 
Service which is funded in another appropriations bill.
    Agency budget estimates for rent are based on GSA's 
projection of what it will charge the Agency in a given budget 
year. GSA sets rates according to the market value of property 
or space occupied, and independent of any agency input. Rent 
receipts are placed in a fund used by GSA in the management of 
its real property operations. All Federal Government agencies 
utilizing Government-owned or leased property pay into this 
fund, which provides GSA with a pool of capital to support 
overall Government space needs. In effect, agencies are paying 
prevailing commercial rental rates in order to subsidize the 
inflated cost of new construction and newly leased space, and 
to provide for vacant space in GSA's inventory.
    Building operations and maintenance.--On October 1, 1984, 
the General Services Administration [GSA] delegated the 
operations and maintenance function for the buildings in the 
D.C. complex to the Department. This activity provides 
departmental staff and support services to operate, maintain, 
and repair the buildings in the D.C. complex. GSA expanded the 
delegation to include two additional buildings on October 1, 
1986. One building is the Government-owned warehouse for forms 
in Lanham, MD, and the other is a leased warehouse for the 
excess property operation located at 49 L Street SW., 
Washington, DC. GSA retains responsibility for major 
nonrecurring repairs.
    Strategic space plan.--The Department's headquarters staff 
is presently housed in a four-building Government-owned complex 
in downtown Washington, DC, and in leased buildings in the 
Metropolitan Washington area. In 1995, USDA initiated a plan to 
improve the delivery of USDA programs to the American people, 
including streamlining the USDA organization. A high-priority 
goal in the Secretary's plan is to improve the operation and 
effectiveness of the USDA headquarters in Washington. To 
implement this goal, a strategy for efficient reallocation of 
space to house the restructed headquarters agencies in modern 
and safe facilities has been proposed. This USDA strategic 
space plan will correct serious problems USDA has faced in its 
facility program including the inefficiencies of operating out 
of scattered leased facilities and serious safety hazards which 
exist in the Agriculture South Building.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For U.S. Department of Agriculture buildings and facilities 
and payments for the rental of space and related services, the 
Committee recommends $135,774,000. This amount is the same as 
the budget request and the House level, and $581,000 more than 
the 1995 appropriation. Included in the Committee's 
recommendation is $89,971,000 for rental payments to the 
General Services Administration [GSA]; $20,216,000 for building 
operations and maintenance; and $25,587,000 for repairs, 
renovations, and construction.

                       Advisory Committees [USDA]

Appropriations, 1995....................................        $928,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................         885,000
House allowance.........................................         800,000

Committee recommendation

                                                                 650,000

    The Department of Agriculture utilizes advisory committees 
to obtain expertise which is not feasible to maintain on the 
permanent staff. Because of the broad range of missions 
performed by the Department and the complexity of skills needed 
in this performance from time to time, it is essential to call 
upon experts in academia and the private sector to supplement 
the expertise of departmental employees in order to assure that 
decisions on major national issues are based upon state-of-the-
art information.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For advisory committees of the Department of Agriculture, 
excluding those relating to the Forest Service and those 
financed from user fees, the Committee recommends $650,000. 
This amount is $235,000 less than the budget request, $150,000 
less than the House level, and $278,000 less than the 1995 
appropriation.
    The Committee expects the Secretary to fund only those 
advisory committees essential to the Department.

                       Hazardous Waste Management

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $15,700,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      15,700,000
House allowance.........................................      15,700,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              15,700,000

    Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act and the Resource Conservation 
and Recovery Act, the Department has the responsibility to meet 
the same standards regarding the storage and disposition of 
hazardous waste as private businesses. The Department is 
required to contain, clean up, monitor, and inspect for 
hazardous waste in areas under the Department's jurisdiction.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends $15,700,000 for hazardous waste 
management. This amount is the same as the budget request, the 
House level, and the 1995 amount.

                      Departmental Administration

Appropriations, 1995 \1\................................     $26,187,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      87,347,000
House allowance.........................................      27,986,000
Committee recommendation................................      27,986,000

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, funds appropriated for the Office of Finance and Management and 
the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization are excluded. 
Funds appropriated for the safety and health management function and 
civil rights enforcement function, which were originally appropriated 
under other accounts, are included. On a comparable basis, USDA 
estimates fiscal year 1995 appropriations of $27,279,000.

    The departmental staff offices provide staff support to the 
top policy officials of the Department and overall direction 
and coordination of the work of USDA's program agencies to 
ensure the efficient and effective management and operation of 
the Department. Activities carried out by the departmental 
staff offices include:
    Personnel.--This office provides leadership, coordination, 
and monitoring of the personnel management program in the 
Department and promulgates departmental policies and procedures 
relating to all personnel functions, and provides liaison with 
the Office of Personnel Management.
    Operations.--This office provides staff and support 
services in the management of real and personal property, 
procurement, contracts, supplies, motor vehicles, and internal 
energy conservation. Under an agreement with GSA, it operates 
and provides maintenance, security, and services to the 
Washington, DC, building complex.
    Information resources management.--This office designs, 
implements, and revises systems, processes, work methods, and 
techniques to improve the management of information resources 
and the operational effectiveness of USDA. This office also 
provides telecommunications and ADP services to USDA agencies 
and staff offices, including the Fort Collins Computer Center 
and the Kansas City Computer Center.
    Civil rights enforcement.--This office develops overall 
policies and manages the Department's civil rights and equal 
opportunity programs; plans and coordinates the participation 
of women, minorities, and disabled persons in departmental 
programs; and directs departmental efforts to further the 
participation of minority colleges and universities in USDA 
programs.
    Administrative law judges and judicial officer.--The 
administrative law judges hold rulemaking and adjudicatory 
hearings and issue initial decisions and orders, and the 
judicial officer serves as final deciding officer in regulatory 
proceedings.
    Disaster management and coordination.--This staff is the 
focal point of contact with the Federal Emergency Management 
Agency and all other Federal departments and agencies having 
emergency program responsibilities and provides oversight, 
coordination, and guidance to USDA agencies in their emergency 
planning, training, and activities.
    Modernization of administration processes.--This staff 
works with USDA agencies and the Chief Financial Officer to 
reengineer administrative processes in the Department to 
achieve efficiencies and integrate these processes with a 
modern accounting and financial reporting system.
    InfoShare.--This program is a customer-oriented method for 
USDA agencies to test, evaluate, and acquire new technologies 
which will emphasize one-stop customer service and integrated 
data sharing. In the past, USDA agencies independently acquired 
or developed data systems, hardware, and software to accomplish 
agency missions. This resulted in redundant business processes, 
a paperwork burden on USDA customers, high financial 
investments, and the inability of agencies to share information 
in an effective timeframe.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For departmental administration, the Committee recommends 
an appropriation of $27,986,000. This amount is $1,799,000 more 
than the amount provided in 1995, $59,361,000 less than the 
budget estimate, and the same as the House level.
    The Committee has recommended funding for the InfoShare 
initiative, which is included in the fiscal year 1996 request 
for this account, under the Office of the Secretary. The 
Committee includes continued funding of $707,000 for the 
functions of the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business 
Utilization under this account.

     Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations

Appropriations, 1995....................................      $1,764,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................   \1\ 1,838,000
House allowance.........................................       3,797,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,764,000

\1\ The 1996 budget proposed that this office be funded in a single 
account under the Office of the Secretary.

    The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional 
Relations maintains liaison with the Congress and White House 
on legislative matters. It also provides for overall direction 
and coordination in the development and implementation of 
policies and procedures applicable to the Department's intra 
and inter-governmental relations.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional 
Relations, the Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$1,764,000. This amount is the same as the amount available for 
1995, $2,033,000 less than the House level, and $74,000 less 
than the budget estimate.
    While the Committee concurs with the House recommendation 
that the Department should eliminate duplication and achieve 
greater efficiencies in its congressional affairs activities, 
it does not agree that this is best achieved by consolidating 
agency congressional affairs functions at the departmental 
level.

                        Office of Communications

Appropriations, 1995....................................      $8,198,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................       8,890,000
House allowance.........................................       8,198,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               8,198,000

    The Office of Communications provides direction, 
leadership, and coordination in the development and delivery of 
useful information through all media to the public on USDA 
programs. The Office serves as the liaison between the 
Department and the many associations and organizations 
representing America's food, fiber, and environmental 
interests.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of Communications, the Committee recommends 
an appropriation of $8,198,000. This amount is the same as the 
1995 and the House levels, and $692,000 less than the budget 
estimate.

                    Office of the Inspector General

Appropriations, 1995 \1\................................     $63,418,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      64,739,000
House allowance.........................................      63,639,000
Committee recommendation................................      63,639,000

\1\ The civil rights enforcement function was transferred to 
departmental administration. On a comparable basis, USDA estimates 
fiscal year 1995 appropriations of $63,288,000.

    The Office of the Inspector General was established October 
12, 1978, by the Inspector General Act of 1978. This act 
expanded and provided specific authorities for the activities 
of the Office of the Inspector General which had previously 
been carried out under the general authorities of the Secretary 
of Agriculture.
    The Office is administered by an inspector general who 
reports directly to the Secretary of Agriculture. Functions and 
responsibilities of this Office include direction or control of 
audit and investigative activities within the Department, 
formulation of audit and investigative policies and procedures 
regarding Department programs and operations, analysis and 
coordination of program-related audit and investigation 
activities performed by other Department agencies, and review 
of existing and proposed legislation and regulations regarding 
the impact such initiatives will have on the economy and 
efficiency of the Department's programs and operations and the 
prevention and detection of fraud and abuse in such programs.
    The activities of this Office are designed to assure 
compliance with existing laws, policies, regulations, and 
programs of the Department's agencies, and to provide 
appropriate officials with the means for prompt corrective 
action where deviations have occurred. The scope of audit and 
investigative activities is large and includes administrative, 
program, and criminal matters. These activities are 
coordinated, when appropriate, with various audit and 
investigative agencies of the executive and legislative 
branches of the Government.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the Inspector General, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $63,639,000. This is $1,100,000 
less than the budget request, the same as the House level, and 
$221,000 more than the 1995 appropriation.
    The Committee has included a provision in the bill to allow 
funds transferred to the Office of the Inspector General [OIG] 
from forfeiture actions in investigations in which the OIG 
participates to be credited to this appropriations account to 
be used for OIG law enforcement activities relating to 
detection and deterrence of fraud and abuse.

                     Office of the General Counsel

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $25,992,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      27,860,000
House allowance.........................................      27,860,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              27,860,000

    The Office of the General Counsel, originally known as the 
Office of the Solicitor, was established in 1910 as the law 
office of the Department of Agriculture, and performs all of 
the legal work arising from the activities of the Department. 
The General Counsel represents the Department on administrative 
proceedings for the promulgation of rules and regulations 
having the force and effect of law and in quasi-judicial 
hearings held in connection with the administration of various 
programs and acts; and in proceedings before the Interstate 
Commerce Commission involving freight rates and practices 
relating to farm commodities, including appeals from and 
decisions of the Commission to the courts. Counsel serves as 
general counsel for the Commodity Credit Corporation and the 
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation and reviews criminal cases 
arising under the programs of the Department for referral to 
the Department of Justice.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the General Counsel, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $27,860,000. This amount is the 
same as the budget request and the House level, and $1,868,000 
more than the 1995 appropriation.
    In recommending the full budget request level for the 
Office of the General Counsel, the Committee concurs with the 
House in its expectation that the Office not supplement its 
budget by seeking reimbursement from other agencies' 
appropriations in this bill.

  Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics

Appropriations, 1995....................................        $520,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     \1\ 535,000
House allowance.........................................         520,000
Committee recommendation................................         520,000

\1\ The 1996 budget proposed that this office be funded in a single 
account under the Office of the Secretary.

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, 
and Economics provides direction and coordination in carrying 
out the laws enacted by the Congress for food and agricultural 
research, education, extension, and economic and statistical 
information. The Office has oversight and management 
responsibilities for the Agricultural Research Service; 
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service; 
Economic Research Service; and National Agricultural Statistics 
Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the Under Secretary for Research, 
Education, and Economics, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $520,000. This amount is $15,000 less than the 
budget request, and the same as the House and 1995 levels.
    Research is the major component driving our Nation's 
achievements in agriculture. The U.S. investment in research 
has paid incalculable dividends in advanced technologies and 
improved management practices which, in turn, have resulted in 
dramatic improvements in our food system from production to 
consumption. Federal agricultural research has managed this 
with less than 2 percent of the total Federal expenditure on 
research and development.
    This Committee has valued the role of Federal research to 
ensure the Nation's people of a continued, economical, 
wholesome, and plentiful food supply while protecting and 
preserving our country's natural resource wealth. As the U.S. 
population and that of the world continues to grow, the demands 
on research to enhance more efficient agricultural production 
will escalate. So, too, will there be pressure for research to 
ensure production efficiencies that will be harmonious with and 
sensitive to the environment, and ensure that the food and 
agriculture system is increasingly competitive in the global 
marketplace.
    Resource limitations prevent this Committee from 
increasing, or even maintaining, support for agriculture 
research, education, and extension activities. However, the 
Committee has dedicated significant resources to maintain our 
agricultural knowledge and technology base, and to finance 
important and priority research in the areas of plant and 
livestock production efficiency, postharvest technologies, new 
uses for agricultural commodities, and to promote trade, 
conservation of natural resources, and food safety and health. 
It is essential that resources be directed to meet the critical 
agricultural needs of both producers and consumers in a time of 
decreasing Federal resources.
    The Committee is aware of breakthroughs in long-term 
natural systems agriculture research and wishes to have these 
research breakthroughs further examined. Therefore, the 
Committee expects the Secretary to make an analysis of the 
feasibility, productive potential, and economic and 
environmental benefits of long-term natural systems agriculture 
and to identify associated near-term research needs.

                       Economic Research Service

Appropriations, 1995 \1\................................     $53,936,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      54,665,000
House allowance.........................................      53,131,000
Committee recommendation................................      53,526,000

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, funds appropriated for the economic analysis staff are excluded. 
These funds are included under executive operations. Funds appropriated 
for the EEO counseling function are excluded. These funds are included 
with the Office of Civil Rights Enforcement under the departmental 
administration appropriation. On a comparable basis, USDA estimates 
fiscal year 1995 appropriations of $53,526,000.

    The Economic Research Service [ERS], originally established 
in 1961 principally under the authority of the Agricultural 
Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621-1627), was reestablished 
under the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture as a USDA 
bureau in 1981.
    ERS produces economic and other social science information 
as a service to the general public and to aid Congress and the 
executive branch in developing, administering, and evaluating 
agricultural and rural policies and programs. ERS monitors, 
analyzes, and forecasts United States and world agricultural 
production and demand for production resources, agricultural 
commodities, and food and fiber products. ERS also measures the 
costs of and returns to agricultural production and marketing; 
evaluates the economic performance of U.S. agricultural 
production and marketing; and estimates the effects of 
Government policies and programs on farmers, rural residents 
and communities, natural resources, and Americans in general. 
In addition, ERS produces economic and other social science 
information about the organization and institutions of the 
United States and world agricultural production and marketing 
systems, natural resources, and rural communities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Economic Research Service, the Committee recommends 
an appropriation of $53,526,000. This amount is $1,139,000 less 
than the budget request, $395,000 more than the House level, 
and $410,000 less than the 1995 appropriation.
    The Committee recommendation includes $395,000, the same as 
the 1995 amount, to continue the rice modeling project 
conducted in coordination with the University of Arkansas and 
the University of Missouri.

                National Agricultural Statistics Service

Appropriations, 1995 \1\................................     $81,424,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      89,837,000
House allowance.........................................      81,107,000
Committee recommendation................................      81,107,000

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, funds appropriated for the economic analysis staff are excluded. 
These funds are included under executive operations. Funds appropriated 
for the EEO counseling function are excluded. These funds are included 
with the Office of Civil Rights Enforcement under the departmental 
administration appropriation. On a comparable basis, USDA estimates 
fiscal year 1995 appropriations of $80,995,000.

    The primary responsibilities of the National Agricultural 
Statistics Service [NASS] are the development and issuance of 
national and State agricultural statistics, statistical 
research, and coordination of the Department's statistical 
programs as authorized under the Agricultural Marketing Act of 
1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621-1627).
    NASS programs are conducted in the following major areas:
    Agricultural estimates.--This area includes estimates of 
production, supply, price, and other aspects of the 
agricultural economy; conduct of enumerative and objective 
measurement surveys; preparation and issuance of the official 
national and State estimates and reports of the Department 
relating to acreages, types and production of farm crops, 
number of livestock on farms, livestock products, stocks of 
agricultural commodities, value and utilization of farm 
products, prices received and paid by farmers, and other 
subjects as required.
    Statistical research and service.--This area includes the 
research on and development of improved statistical techniques 
used in gathering and evaluating statistical data, including 
use of satellite data.
    Work performed for others.--Services are performed for 
other Federal and State agencies and private commodity 
organizations on a reimbursable or advance payment basis. These 
services consist primarily of conducting surveys and performing 
related statistical data collection activities. They also 
include technical consultation and support and technical 
assistance programs abroad under participating agency service 
agreements.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the National Agricultural Statistics Service, the 
Committee recommends an appropriation of $81,107,000. This 
amount is $317,000 less than the 1995 amount, $8,730,000 less 
than the budget estimate, and the same as the House recommended 
level.

                     Agricultural Research Service

Appropriations, 1995 \1\................................    $714,689,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     709,810,000
House allowance.........................................     705,610,000
Committee recommendation................................     707,000,000

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, funds appropriated for the agricultural information and library 
services functions under the National Agricultural Library are included. 
Funds appropriated for the EEO counseling function are excluded. These 
funds are included with the Office of Civil Rights Enforcement under the 
departmental administration appropriation. On a comparable basis, USDA 
estimates fiscal year 1995 appropriations of $714,394,000.

    The Agricultural Research Service [ARS] is responsible for 
conducting basic, applied, and developmental research on: soil 
and water conservation; plant productivity; animal 
productivity; commodity conversion and delivery; human 
nutrition; and integration of agricultural systems. The 
research applies to a wide range of goals, commodities, natural 
resources, fields of science, and geographic, climatic, and 
environmental conditions.
    ARS is also responsible for the National Agricultural 
Library which provides agricultural information and library 
services through traditional library functions and modern 
electronic dissemination to agencies of the USDA, public and 
private organizations, and individuals.
    As the U.S. Department of Agriculture's in-house 
agricultural research unit, ARS has major responsibilities for 
conducting and leading the national agricultural research 
effort. It provides initiative and leadership in five areas: 
research on broad regional and national problems; research to 
support Federal action and regulatory agencies; expertise to 
meet national emergencies; research support for international 
programs; and scientific resource to the executive branch and 
Congress.
    The mission of ARS research is to develop new knowledge and 
technology which will ensure an abundance of high-quality 
agricultural commodities and products at reasonable prices to 
meet the increasing needs of an expanding economy and to 
provide for the continued improvement in the standard of living 
of all Americans. This mission focuses on the development of 
technical information and technical products which bear 
directly on the need to: (1) manage and use the Nation's soil, 
water, air, and climate resources, and improve the Nation's 
environment; (2) provide an adequate supply of agricultural 
products by observing practices that will maintain a permanent 
and effective agriculture; (3) improve the nutrition and well-
being of the American people; (4) improve living in rural 
America; and (5) strengthen the Nation's balance of payments.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    Salaries and expenses.--For salaries and expenses of the 
Agricultural Research Service, the Committee recommends 
$707,000,000. This is $7,689,000 less than the 1995 level, 
$2,810,000 less than the budget request, and $1,390,000 more 
than the House level.
    The Committee's recommendations with respect to specific 
areas of research are as follows:
    Apple research.--The Committee recommends no less than the 
1995 level for the continuation of apple research in the area 
of pesticide use and postharvest technologies. The Committee 
expects ARS to coordinate this research with the International 
Apple Institute. The Committee further expects that the level 
of funds provided in 1995 to postharvest technology research at 
Pennsylvania State University's Fruit Research Laboratory at 
Biglerville, PA, be continued.
    Arkansas staffing.--The Committee recommends an increase of 
$125,000 for scientist staffing for the aquaculture unit at 
Pine Bluff, AR, and encourages continued coordination with 
activities at the Stuttgart, AR, aquaculture facility.
    Arkansas Children's Hospital.--The Committee continues its 
support for the ARS Center of Excellence in Nutrition Research 
located at the Arkansas Children's Hospital Research Institute 
and provides an increase of $300,000 above the fiscal year 1995 
level.
    ARS research laboratories.--The Committee concurs with the 
administration's proposal to close the Brawley, CA; Houma, LA; 
Reno, NV; Brownwood, TX; and Jackson, TN, ARS laboratories. The 
Committee has retained House bill language to convey the 
Federal properties and assets at Brawley, CA; Brownwood, TX; 
Houma, LA; and Lewisburg, TN, to non-Federal ownership. Savings 
will be achieved from the termination of administrative 
services, indirect research support costs, and facilities' 
maintenance and operational costs at these locations. Funding 
is provided to continue research currently conducted at the 
Brawley and Brownwood laboratories and to transfer the soybean 
research program from Jackson, TN, to Stoneville, MS, as 
requested. To maintain the strong public/private research 
partnership in Houma between the Louisiana sugarcane industry 
and the ARS, the Committee expects the ARS to continue research 
at the Houma facility as a designated worksite of the ARS 
Southern Regional Research Center in New Orleans, LA. In 
addition, continued funding is provided for the Miami, FL, and 
Sidney, MT, ARS laboratories, as well as funding to maintain 
Orono, ME; East Grand Forks, MN; Clemson, SC; Chatsworth, NJ; 
and El Reno, OK, as ARS worksites. Research direction and 
administration of these locations will be shifted to primary 
ARS laboratories, achieving savings in indirect research 
support costs and administrative services.
    Bee research.--The Committee recommends $5,208,000 for bee 
research, the same amount as the budget request. The Committee 
expects continued work on varroa mite control and chalkbrood 
biological control. The Committee further expects ARS to 
continue to cooperate with regional universities through 
extramural agreements at the current levels.
    Biological control research.--The Committee is encouraged 
by results of a project at the Midsouth Research Center aimed 
at biological control of heliothis. This pilot project seeks to 
produce economic and environmental benefits through proposed 
reductions in pesticide use. The Committee provides the fiscal 
year 1995 level of funding, the same as the budget request, for 
the ARS to continue this research project in fiscal year 1996.
    Center for Food Safety and Postharvest Technology.--The 
Committee is aware of the significance of the research 
currently underway relating to catfish products at the 
Mississsippi Center for Food Safety and Postharvest Technology 
and supports the expansion of the program to include other 
foods.
    Cereal crops research.--The Committee includes an 
additional $200,000 to provide an adequate level of support for 
the cereal crop research unit located at the University of 
Wisconsin-Madison.
    The Committee also notes the need for an additional small 
grains plant pathologist at the Cereal Rust Laboratory at the 
University of Minnesota and urges the Department to consider 
funding this additional scientist.
    Chronic disease research.--The Committee provides an 
additional $1,000,000, the same as the budget request, to 
expand research on the diet effects on nutrition. This research 
will focus on new approaches to nutrient needs of the elderly 
to maintain cognitive and neurological functions, as well as 
muscle and bone strength. Interactions of food components in 
decreasing risk of disease will be targeted.
    Corn germplasm research.--The Committee provides continued 
funding at the fiscal year 1995 level for the special corn 
germplasm research program. The program holds significant 
promise for improving the genetic base of U.S. corn hybrids to 
improve yield prospects and resistance to insect, disease, and 
weather-related problems.
    Cotton value-added/quality research.--U.S. agriculture's 
continued economic strength depends on efficient production and 
value-added technology. The Committee urges ARS to continue to 
place high priority on cotton textile processing research 
conducted at New Orleans, LA, to improve quality, reduce 
defects, and improve easy-care products. The Committee 
recommends funding at the budget request level for this 
research.
    Delta nutrition and health promotion initiative.--The 
Committee has provided $2,550,000, the same as the budget 
estimate, to begin implementation of the delta nutrition and 
health promotion initiative, to be carried out by six 
universities and institutions in Louisiana, Arkansas, and 
Mississippi in a unique partnership with the Agricultural 
Research Service.
    Endophyte.--For the center of excellence in endophyte/grass 
research to be operated cooperatively by the University of 
Missouri and the University of Arkansas, the Committee 
recommends $200,000, the same as the budget request. The 
purpose of this research is to enhance the sustainability of 
fescue-based beef production and to develop innovative 
applications of endophyte in improving stress resistance in 
other forage, turf, and grain crop species.
    Fish Farming Experiment Laboratory.--The Committee provides 
an increase of $500,000 above the fiscal year 1995 level for 
the Fish Farming Experiment Laboratory in Stuttgart, AR. The 
Committee notes that this continues Federal funding for the 
laboratory at the fiscal year 1995 level and reflects only the 
transfer of the facility from the Department of the Interior to 
the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The Committee directs the 
ARS to continue ongoing research at this facility consistent 
with the authorities contained in the Fish Rice Rotation Act 
(Public Law 85-342) and to provide technology and information 
transfers as authorized by 15 U.S.C. 3710.
    The Committee acknowledges the importance of avoiding 
duplication in research being administered by the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture at various locations throughout the 
country. In order to ensure that duplication does not occur in 
the field of warmwater aquaculture research, the Stuttgart 
research facility should not engage in channel catfish research 
related to production systems, nutrition, water quality, 
genetics, disease diagnosis, or food processing which is 
ongoing at the National Warmwater Aquaculture Research Center 
at Stoneville, MS.
    Fruit fly.--The Committee continues its fiscal year 1995 
recommendation to scale back the fruit fly eradication 
experiment in Hawaii to release funds for the development and 
approval of high-priority quarantine treatments to enable 
shipment of diversified agricultural products to domestic and 
foreign destinations. The Committee directs the ARS to continue 
to provide $300,000 to the Hawaii Institute of Tropical 
Agriculture and Human Resources to develop and implement a 
program to address the papaya ringspot virus that is 
devastating papaya production in the Puna District of the 
Island of Hawaii; and $300,000 to the Hawaii Institute of 
Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources for a program to 
create nematode resistance in commercial pineapple cultivars. 
In addition, the Committee expects the Tropical Fruit and 
Vegetable Laboratory of the ARS to continue research on the 
papaya ringspot virus in collaboration with the Hawaii 
Institute of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources. The 
Committee views the nematode and ringspot virus activities as 
supportive of a national agricultural research agenda as well 
as one specific to Hawaii.
    Fruit research.--The Committee is aware of the very 
important work carried out on fruit research at Wenatchee and 
Yakima in the State of Washington. The Committee will expect 
the Department to continue to give increased attention to the 
important work carried out at these two facilities.
    Grain legume research.--The Committee acknowledges the 
importance of a grain legume genetics research position at 
Washington State University in Pullman, WA. This research will 
focus on approaches to increase surface crop residues and on 
methods to overcome disease and insect problems in grain 
legumes. The Committee encourages the Department to consider 
funding this important research position.
    Grain sorghum research.--The Committee encourages the ARS 
to employ a research scientist with expertise in molecular 
biology to perform research on developing grain sorghum 
resistance to chinch bugs and green bugs, utilizing the tools 
of biotechnology, at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. The 
research performed to date is promising and merits continued 
support.
    Hops.--The Committee recognizes the outstanding increase in 
production of the U.S. hops industry, which has taken the lead 
in worldwide production, and of Washington State which produces 
75 percent of the total U.S. crop. Included in the 
recommendation is $395,000, the same as the fiscal year 1995 
and budget request levels, to continue hops research in the 
Pacific Northwest.
    Improved air quality.--The Committee provides $500,000 of 
the increase requested to expand research on the mechanisms and 
means of control of PM-10 dust emission. Research will include 
an assessment of fugitive dust-sized particles as a result of 
farming operations, emissions during tillage operations and 
generation and entrainment of fugitive dust particles during 
windstorms.
    Jointed goatgrass control.--Jointed goatgrass infests 
nearly 5 million acres of winter wheat in the western United 
States, costing wheat growers an estimated $145,000,000 
annually. Jointed goatgrass is impossible to control 
selectively in wheat with current methods because it is 
genetically related to wheat and has increased rapidly with 
widespread adoption of conservation tillage systems. It reduces 
yields, increases dockage costs, and reduces grain and seed 
value. The Committee expects the ARS to continue, at the fiscal 
year 1995 level, in the multidisciplinary national research 
effort among State and Federal scientists to develop effective 
control measures to reduce the impact of jointed goatgrass on 
wheat production. This research is to be coordinated with 
companion research funded by the Cooperative State Research, 
Education, and Extension Service.
    Kenaf.--The Committee recommends continued funding at the 
fiscal year 1995 level for the cooperative agreement between 
ARS and Mississippi State University to further kenaf research 
and product development efforts.
    Livestock and range research.--The Committee provides an 
increase of $80,000 to support the replacement of one of the 
quantitative beef cattle geneticists with a molecular 
geneticist at the ARS Fort Keogh Livestock and Range Research 
Center in Miles City, MT. This will enable the laboratory to 
capitalize fully on the latest available gene marker technology 
in expediting the use of animal genetics in the development of 
ecologically and economically sustainable range animal 
management systems.
    Methyl bromide.--For research on a replacement for methyl 
bromide the Committee has provided $13,139,000, the same as the 
1995 and budget request levels. Methyl bromide is a critically 
important chemical for agricultural producers throughout the 
Nation. Given the approaching ban of methyl bromide from the 
marketplace in the year 2000, the U.S. agriculture industry 
must find viable and cost-effective alternatives to methyl 
bromide. The Committee expects the ARS to work with the Crop 
Protection Coalition on this research and to direct the 
research to those facilities and universities that have 
expertise or ongoing programs in this area.
    Minor crop pest control.--The Committee directs ARS to 
continue its work on developing environmentally safe methods to 
control pests in tropical and subtropical agricultural systems 
and to work in collaboration with the University of Hawaii on 
these issues. The Committee recommends continued funding at the 
1995 level for the Hawaii Institute of Tropical Agriculture and 
Human Resources at the University of Hawaii to collaborate in 
this research effort.
    National Agricultural Library.--The Committee provides an 
increase of $751,000 for the National Agricultural Library's 
preservation and storage program and electronic information 
initiative. In addition, the Committee provides continued 
funding at the fiscal year 1995 level for the National Center 
for Agricultural Law Research and Information at the Leflar 
School of Law in Fayetteville, AR.
    National Sedimentation Laboratory.--The Committee continues 
funding at the fiscal year 1995 level, the same as the budget 
request, for work now underway at the National Sedimentation 
Laboratory, and encourages the ARS to provide additional 
support to the laboratory in accordance with the approved 
cooperative agreement. The laboratory is to expand its studies 
on the use of acoustics to characterize soils, determine 
moisture content, and monitor crop growth. Further, it is 
encouraged to continue its close relationship with the National 
Center for Physical Acoustics in these research efforts and to 
develop additional applications.
    National Warmwater Aquaculture Research Center.--The 
Committee acknowledges that progress has been made toward the 
original plans for fully staffing the National Warmwater 
Aquaculture Research Center at Stoneville, MS. In recognition 
of the need to continue the expansion of research for the 
future of aquaculture throughout the Midsouth region, the 
Committee encourages ARS to establish a critical mass of 
research capabilities as originally proposed by the agency. 
Priority is to be given to the completion of the staffing for 
this center. In this regard, the Committee provides $650,000 
above the fiscal year 1995 level to continue to meet the 
objectives outlined in the original USDA plan for the 
Aquaculture Center.
    Northwest Nursery Crops Research Center.--Nursery and 
greenhouse products rank No. 1 among Oregon's diverse 
agricultural commodities and third in the Nation. As the public 
demands more and more plants and trees to help clean and cool 
the air, stem runoff and soil erosion, and improve water 
quality and conservation, the nursery industry is playing an 
expanding and significant environmental and research role. The 
Committee encourages the ARS to expand its support for the 
Northwest Nursery Crops Research Center's research program in 
these environmental areas.
    Northwest Small Fruits Research Center.--The Committee 
recommends $500,000 above the fiscal year 1995 level for 
additional research at the Northwest Small Fruits Research 
Center. Oregon, Washington, and Idaho are major producers of 
berry and grape crops. The small fruits industry is composed of 
2,800 growers and 240 processors with a processed value of over 
$375,000,000.
    Peanut research.--The Committee supports research 
activities at the Peanut Research Unit in Stillwater, OK. The 
Committee understands that the Stillwater facility conducts 
vital plant pathology, plant breeding, and plant physiology 
research which benefits the entire southwestern U.S. peanut 
industry. The Committee recommends continued funding for this 
program.
    Pear thrip.--The recommendation provides the 1995 level of 
funding to continue research on various nonchemical means of 
controlling pear thrip, including fungi and other biological 
means. This pest is particularly devastating to maples in New 
England, and the research should be carried out in that region. 
The Committee's recommendation includes continued funding for 
the pear thrip cooperative agreement with the University of 
Vermont.
    Poisonous plants.--Poisonous plants rank high among the 
causes of economic loss to the livestock industry. It has been 
estimated that the livestock industry of the 17 Western States 
sustains an estimated $340,000,000 annual loss to deaths and 
reproductive failure from poisonous plants. The Committee 
encourages the ARS to provide an adequate level of support to 
the Poisonous Plant Laboratory, Logan, UT, which conducts 
research on livestock poisoning by plants for the United States 
and is studying ways to reduce losses.
    Potato research.--The Committee urges the Agricultural 
Research Service to continue to work closely with the National 
Potato Council on how funds can best be used to solve 
production and marketing problems relating to early dying, 
marketing, potato scab, ring rot, variety development, aphids, 
and beetle insect problems. The Committee further recognizes 
the need for research relating to late blight, a new disease 
that is causing major losses in potato production.
    Program continuations.--In addition to those research 
programs specifically mentioned herein, the Committee directs 
the ARS to continue at the fiscal year 1995 level the following 
areas of research: silverleaf whitefly; weed control research, 
including yellow starthistle control and eradication, in 
Albany, CA; insect pests of pecans research; remote sensing 
research; wild rice research; potato research; natural products 
research; sugarbeets research; vegetable handling research; 
fungal phytase research; lyme disease research; meats and 
poultry research at Beltsville; forage research; and zinc/human 
nutrition research at Ithaca.
    Rural development.--The Committee provides $200,000, the 
same as the budget request, to establish a rural development 
program at Alcorn State University, the oldest historically 
black land-grant university in the Nation. This program will 
focus on improving hog farming and breeding stock and on the 
development of a viable education and extension program on 
cooperatives.
    Rural geriatric nutrition.--The Committee provides $250,000 
for the ARS to initiate a research program at the Geissinger 
Health System's Rural Geriatric Nutrition Center in Danville, 
PA. The Committee understands that this research will include 
studies of malnutrition and overnourishment in rural geriatric 
populations.
    Small farms.--The Committee expects the ARS to continue its 
support for the South Central Family Farm Research Center at 
Booneville, AR. The Committee has provided a $500,000 increase 
for agroforestry research in conjunction with work at the 
University of Missouri.
    Southern Insect Management Laboratory.--For several years, 
the Committee has urged the Department to participate in a 
joint research project with the National Center for Physical 
Acoustics [NCPA]. The Committee provides $200,000, $50,000 
above the fiscal year 1995 level, for a cooperative agreement 
with the National Center for Physical Acoustics to develop 
automated methods to monitor pest populations using advanced 
acoustic techniques; at least $180,000 of this amount will be 
used to support the existing program at the NCPA.
    Soybean research.--The Committee provides continued funding 
for soybean composition research, production agronomy and 
breeding programs as in previous fiscal years, and expects the 
agency to continue to emphasize these research priorities.
    Subterranean termite.--The Committee recognizes the 
substantial damage to forests and structures caused by 
subterranean termites in Hawaii and in other States. The 
Committee further recognizes the need to devise effective 
termite control methods that do not endanger public health and 
safety. The Committee recommends that the ARS continue funding 
the termite research work in Hawaii.
    Sugarcane research, Hawaii.--The Committee provides the 
fiscal year 1995 level of funding for the ARS to continue its 
research program at the Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association 
Experiment Station. The Committee expects this program to 
assist in maintaining the competitiveness of the remaining 
sugarcane plantations and to continue to serve as the premier 
sugarcane research institution supporting sugarcane research 
throughout the United States. The Committee further expects 
that these funds will support the expansion of new crops and 
products to complement sugarcane production.
    Tropical aquaculture research.--The Committee recognizes 
the important role of tropical aquaculture in reversing the 
Nation's trade deficits in seafood products and in creating 
long-term sustainable employment of human and marine resources. 
The Committee further recognizes the significant scientific and 
commercial contributions offered by the expertise and natural 
resource conditions found in Hawaii. To fully realize these 
benefits, the Committee continues the fiscal year 1995 levels 
of funding for the aquaculture productivity research and the 
requirements and sources of nutrients for marine shrimp 
projects in Hawaii.
    Water quality.--The Committee acknowledges the progress 
which has been made toward water quality objectives in 
conjunction with the pesticide application technology research 
currently conducted at the Midsouth Research Center. The ARS 
should continue this joint research initiative and expand it in 
meeting the Department's integrated pest management objectives.
    Wheat virus research.--Wheat virus diseases are a major 
problem both in Nebraska and other wheat producing areas of the 
country. The Committee provides an increase of $300,000 to 
continue support for two ARS wheat virologist positions in 
Lincoln, NE. This cooperative program with the Nebraska 
Agricultural Experiment Station program has been successful in 
solving many crucial problems in wheat virology and continues 
to focus on wheat virus disease problems of regional, national, 
and international significance.
    In complying with the Committee's intentions, ARS is 
expected not to redirect support for programs from one State to 
another without prior notification to and approval by the House 
and Senate Committees on Appropriations. In addition, unless 
otherwise directed, the Agricultural Research Service shall 
implement unspecified reductions necessary to carry out the 
provisions of this bill in accordance with the definitions 
contained in the ``Program, project, and activity'' section of 
this report.

                        buildings and facilities

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $43,718,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      30,200,000
House allowance.........................................      30,200,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              30,200,000

    The ARS ``Buildings and facilities'' account was 
established for the acquisition of land, construction, repair, 
improvement, extension, alteration, and purchase of fixed 
equipment or facilities of, or used by, the Agricultural 
Research Service. Routine construction or replacement items 
continue to be funded under the limitations contained in the 
regular account.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For buildings and facilities owned and operated by the 
Agricultural Research Service, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $30,200,000. This is the same as the budget 
estimate and the House level, and $13,518,000 less than the 
amount provided in 1995. These funds shall remain available 
until expended. The following table shows the Committee's 
provisions:

                                          ARS BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES                                          
                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Fiscal year                                          
           State and facility              Fiscal year     1996 budget        House      Committeerecommendation
                                          1995 enacted      estimate        allowance                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona: Water Conservation Laboratory                                                                          
 and Western Cotton Research                                                                                    
 Laboratory, Maricopa..................             396  ..............  ..............  .......................
Arkansas: National Rice Research                                                                                
 Center, Stuttgart.....................           4,752  ..............  ..............                1,000    
California:                                                                                                     
    Horticulture Crops Research                                                                                 
     Laboratory, Parlier...............           2,630  ..............  ..............  .......................
    Western Regional Research Center,                                                                           
     Albany............................             919  ..............  ..............  .......................
Florida: Horticultural Research                                                                                 
 Laboratory, Fort Pierce...............           2,900  ..............           1,500                1,500    
France: European Biological Control                                                                             
 Laboratory, Montpellier...............  ..............           2,600           2,600  .......................
Illinois: National Center for                                                                                   
 Agricultural Utilization Research,                                                                             
 Peoria................................  ..............          11,700           9,700                4,900    
Iowa: National Swine Research Facility,                                                                         
 Ames..................................           6,259  ..............  ..............  .......................
Kansas: Grain Marketing Research                                                                                
 Laboratory, Manhattan.................             950  ..............  ..............  .......................
Louisiana: Southern Regional Research                                                                           
 Center, New Orleans...................           2,934             900             900                  900    
Maryland: Agricultural Research Center,                                                                         
 Beltsville............................           3,960          10,000           8,000                8,000    
Mississippi:                                                                                                    
    National Center for Natural                                                                                 
     Products, Oxford..................           3,578  ..............  ..............                1,500    
    National Center for Warmwater                                                                               
     Aquaculture, Stoneville...........           1,747  ..............  ..............                1,900    
New York: Plum Island Animal Disease                                                                            
 Center, Greenport.....................           1,168           5,000           5,000                5,000    
South Carolina: U.S. Vegetable                                                                                  
 Laboratory, Charleston................           5,544  ..............  ..............                4,000    
Texas:                                                                                                          
    Plant Stress and Water Conservation                                                                         
     Laboratory, Lubbock...............           1,051  ..............           1,500                1,500    
    Subtropical Agricultural Research                                                                           
     Laboratory, Weslaco...............           3,009  ..............           1,000  .......................
    West Virginia: National Center for                                                                          
     Coldwater Aquaculture.............           1,921  ..............  ..............  .......................
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total..........................          43,718          30,200          30,200               30,200    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee makes available $1,000,000 for unanticipated 
costs necessary to complete the Rice Germplasm Laboratory in 
Stuttgart, AR. ARS is directed to apply any unused portion of 
this amount to other high priority projects.
    The Committee is aware that some research proposed for the 
Fort Pierce, FL, laboratory is being conducted at Charleston, 
SC, and Miami, FL, laboratories. Given this, the ARS should 
reconsider the proposed size, scientific capacity, and mission 
of the Fort Pierce laboratory. It is expected that research in 
the fields of production competitiveness; pest management; and 
harvesting and postharvesting techniques for vegetable, citrus, 
nursery, and ornamental crops, will be conducted at the Fort 
Pierce laboratory. This will permit ARS to better serve the 
needs of the growing horticultural industries throughout 
Florida and the Southeast. Moreover, Florida's unique 
subtropical climate and close proximity to Mexico, South 
America, and Central America require new technologies to 
control exotic pest introductions.

      Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service

    The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
Service was established by the Secretary of Agriculture on 
October 1, 1994, under the authority of the Department of 
Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6912). The 
Service was created by the merger of the Cooperative State 
Research Service and Extension Service. The mission is to work 
with university partners to advance research, extension, and 
higher education in the food and agricultural sciences and 
related environmental and human sciences to benefit people, 
communities, and the Nation.

                         research and education

Appropriations, 1995 \1\................................\2\ $432,387,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     432,212,000
House allowance.........................................     389,172,000
Committee recommendation................................     418,172,000

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, funds appropriated for the EEO counseling function are excluded. 
These funds are included with the Office of Civil Rights Enforcement 
under the departmental administration appropriation. On a comparable 
basis, USDA estimates fiscal year 1995 appropriations of $432,380,000.
\2\ Reflects enacted rescission of $1,051,000.

    The research and education programs administered by the 
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service 
[CSREES] are the U.S. Department of Agriculture's principal 
entree to the university system of the United States for the 
purpose of conducting agricultural research as authorized by 
the Hatch Act of 1887, as amended (7 U.S.C. 361a-361i); the 
Cooperative Forestry Research Act of 1962, as amended (16 
U.S.C. 582a-7); Public Law 89-106, section (2), as amended (7 
U.S.C. 450i); and the National Agricultural Research, 
Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977, as amended (7 
U.S.C. 3101 et seq.). Through these authorities, the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture participates with State and other 
sources of funding to encourage and assist the State 
institutions in the conduct of agricultural research through 
the State agricultural experiment stations of the 50 States, 
the District of Columbia, and the territories; by approved 
schools of forestry; by the 1890 land-grant institutions and 
Tuskegee University; by colleges of veterinary medicine; and by 
other eligible institutions.
    The research and education programs participate in a 
nationwide system of agricultural research program planning and 
coordination among the State institutions, U.S. Department of 
Agriculture, and the agricultural industry of America.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendations for research and education activities of the 
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service:

 COOPERATIVE STATE RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND EXTENSION SERVICE [CSREES]--
                    RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES                   
                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Committee 
                      1995      1996 budget  Houseallowance   recommen- 
                 appropriation                                  dation  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Payments under                                                          
 Hatch Act.....       171,304      171,304        166,165       171,304 
Cooperative                                                             
 forestry                                                               
 research                                                               
 (McIntire-                                                             
 Stennis)......        20,809       20,809         20,185        20,809 
Payments to                                                             
 1890 colleges                                                          
 and Tuskegee..        28,157       28,157         27,313        28,157 
Special                                                                 
 research                                                               
 grants (Public                                                         
 Law 89-106):                                                           
    Aflatoxin                                                           
     (Illinois)           113   ...........           113           113 
    Agricultura                                                         
     l                                                                  
     diversific                                                         
     ation                                                              
     (Hawaii)..           131   ...........  ..............         131 
    Agricultura                                                         
     l                                                                  
     management                                                         
     systems                                                            
     (Massachus                                                         
     etts).....           221   ...........  ..............         221 
    Alfalfa                                                             
     (Kansas)..           106   ...........           106           106 
    Alliance                                                            
     for food                                                           
     protection                                                         
     (Nebraska,                                                         
     Georgia)..  .............  ...........           300    ...........
    Alternative                                                         
     cropping                                                           
     systems                                                            
     (Southeast                                                         
     ).........           235   ...........  ..............         235 
    Alternative                                                         
     crops                                                              
     (North                                                             
     Dakota)...           592   ...........  ..............         550 
    Alternative                                                         
     crops for                                                          
     arid lands                                                         
     (Texas)...            85   ...........            85    ...........
    Alternative                                                         
     marine and                                                         
     fresh                                                              
     water                                                              
     species                                                            
     (Mississip                                                         
     pi).......           308   ...........  ..............         308 
    Alternative                                                         
     pest                                                               
     control                                                            
     (Arkansas)         1,184   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Alternative                                                         
     s to                                                               
     pesticides                                                         
     and                                                                
     critical                                                           
     issues....  .............       5,000          2,000    ...........
    Aquaculture                                                         
     (Connectic                                                         
     ut).......           181   ...........           181    ...........
    Aquaculture                                                         
     (Illinois)           169   ...........           169           169 
    Aquaculture                                                         
     (Louisiana                                                         
     ).........           330   ...........           330           330 
    Aquaculture                                                         
     (Mississip                                                         
     pi).......           592   ...........  ..............         592 
    Aquatic                                                             
     food                                                               
     safety and                                                         
     quality                                                            
     (Florida).           181   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Asian                                                               
     products                                                           
     laboratory                                                         
     (Oregon)..           212   ...........  ..............         212 
    Babcock                                                             
     Institute                                                          
     (Wisconsin                                                         
     ).........           312   ...........  ..............         312 
    Barley feed                                                         
     for                                                                
     rangeland                                                          
     cattle                                                             
     (Montana).  .............  ...........  ..............         250 
    Beef fat                                                            
     content                                                            
     (Iowa)....           201   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Biodiesel                                                           
     research                                                           
     (Missouri)           152   ...........  ..............         152 
    Biotechnolo                                                         
     gy                                                                 
     (Oregon)..  .............  ...........  ..............         217 
    Broom                                                               
     snakeweed                                                          
     (New                                                               
     Mexico)...           169   ...........           169           169 
    Canola                                                              
     (Kansas)..            85   ...........            85            85 
    Center for                                                          
     Animal                                                             
     Health and                                                         
     Productivi                                                         
     ty                                                                 
     (Pennsylva                                                         
     nia)......           113   ...........           113    ...........
    Center for                                                          
     Innovative                                                         
     Food                                                               
     Technology                                                         
     (Ohio)....           181   ...........           181    ...........
    Center for                                                          
     Rural                                                              
     Studies                                                            
     (Vermont).            32   ...........  ..............          32 
    Chesapeake                                                          
     Bay                                                                
     aquacultur                                                         
     e.........           370   ...........           370           370 
    Competitive                                                         
     ness of                                                            
     agricultur                                                         
     al                                                                 
     products                                                           
     (Washingto                                                         
     n)........           677   ...........           500           677 
    Cool season                                                         
     legume                                                             
     research                                                           
     (Idaho,                                                            
     Washington                                                         
     ).........           103   ...........           103           329 
    Cranberry/                                                          
     blueberry                                                          
     disease                                                            
     and                                                                
     breeding                                                           
     (New                                                               
     Jersey)...           220   ...........  ..............         220 
    CRP acreage                                                         
     usage                                                              
     (Missouri)            52   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Dairy and                                                           
     meat goat                                                          
     research                                                           
     (Texas)...            63   ...........            63            63 
    Delta rural                                                         
     revitaliza                                                         
     tion                                                               
     (Mississip                                                         
     pi).......           148   ...........  ..............         148 
    Developing                                                          
     peas and                                                           
     lentils                                                            
     for                                                                
     residue to                                                         
     meet SCS                                                           
     standards                                                          
     (Washingto                                                         
     n)........           226   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Dried bean                                                          
     (North                                                             
     Dakota)...            85   ...........            85            85 
    Drought                                                             
     mitigation                                                         
     (Nebraska)           200   ...........           200           200 
    Energy                                                              
     biomass/                                                           
     biofuels..  .............         750   ..............  ...........
    Environment                                                         
     al                                                                 
     research                                                           
     (New York)           486   ...........           486    ...........
    Expanded                                                            
     wheat                                                              
     pasture                                                            
     (Oklahoma)           285   ...........  ..............         285 
    Farm and                                                            
     rural                                                              
     business                                                           
     finance                                                            
     (Arkansas,                                                         
     Illinois).           106   ...........  ..............         106 
    Floricultur                                                         
     e (Hawaii)           250   ...........  ..............         250 
    Food and                                                            
     Agricultur                                                         
     e Policy                                                           
     Institute                                                          
     (Iowa,                                                             
     Missouri).           850   ...........           850           850 
    Food                                                                
     irradiatio                                                         
     n (Iowa)..           201   ...........  ..............         201 
    Food                                                                
     Marketing                                                          
     Policy                                                             
     Center                                                             
     (Connectic                                                         
     ut).......           332   ...........           332           332 
    Food                                                                
     Processing                                                         
     Center                                                             
     (Nebraska)            42   ...........  ..............          42 
    Food safety                                                         
     consortium                                                         
     (Arkansas,                                                         
     Kansas,                                                            
     Iowa).....         1,743   ...........         1,743         1,743 
    Food                                                                
     Systems                                                            
     Research                                                           
     Group                                                              
     (Wisconsin                                                         
     ).........           221   ...........           221           221 
    Forestry                                                            
     (Arkansas)           523   ...........  ..............         523 
    Fruit and                                                           
     vegetable                                                          
     market                                                             
     analysis                                                           
     (Arizona,                                                          
     Missouri).           296   ...........           296    ...........
    Generic                                                             
     commodity                                                          
     promotion                                                          
     research,                                                          
     and                                                                
     evaluation                                                         
     (New York)           212   ...........           212    ...........
    Global                                                              
     change \1\  .............       3,500          1,625         1,615 
    Global                                                              
     marketing                                                          
     support                                                            
     service                                                            
     (Arkansas)            92   ...........  ..............          92 
    Grass seed                                                          
     cropping                                                           
     systems                                                            
     for a                                                              
     sustainabl                                                         
     e                                                                  
     agricultur                                                         
     e                                                                  
     (Washingto                                                         
     n, Oregon,                                                         
     Idaho)....           423   ...........           423           423 
    Great                                                               
     Plains                                                             
     Agricultur                                                         
     al Policy                                                          
     Center                                                             
     (Oklahoma)            42   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Human                                                               
     nutrition                                                          
     (Arkansas)  .............  ...........           425    ...........
    Human                                                               
     nutrition                                                          
     (Iowa)....           473   ...........  ..............         473 
    Human                                                               
     nutrition                                                          
     (Louisiana                                                         
     ).........           752   ...........           752           752 
    Human                                                               
     nutrition                                                          
     (New York)           622   ...........           622    ...........
    Illinois-                                                           
     Missouri                                                           
     Alliance                                                           
     for                                                                
     Biotechnol                                                         
     ogy.......         1,357   ...........         1,357         1,357 
    Improved                                                            
     dairy                                                              
     management                                                         
     practices                                                          
     (Pennsylva                                                         
     nia)......           296   ...........           296    ...........
    Improved                                                            
     fruit                                                              
     practices                                                          
     (Michigan)           445   ...........           445           445 
    Institute                                                           
     for Food                                                           
     Science                                                            
     and                                                                
     Engineerin                                                         
     g                                                                  
     (Arkansas)  .............  ...........  ..............       1,184 
    Integrated                                                          
     production                                                         
     systems                                                            
     (Oklahoma)           161   ...........  ..............         161 
    Internation                                                         
     al arid                                                            
     lands                                                              
     consortium           329   ...........           329    ...........
    Iowa                                                                
     biotechnol                                                         
     ogy                                                                
     consortium         1,792   ...........  ..............       1,792 
    Jointed                                                             
     goatgrass                                                          
     (Washingto                                                         
     n)........           296   ...........           296           296 
    Landscaping                                                         
     for water                                                          
     quality                                                            
     (Georgia).  .............  ...........           300    ...........
    Livestock                                                           
     and dairy                                                          
     policy                                                             
     (New York,                                                         
     Texas)....           445   ...........           445           445 
    Lowbush                                                             
     blueberry                                                          
     research                                                           
     (Maine)...           220   ...........  ..............         220 
                                                                        
    Low-input                                                           
     agricultur                                                         
     e                                                                  
     (Minnesota                                                         
     ).........           195   ...........  ..............  ...........
                                                                        
    Maple                                                               
     research                                                           
     (Vermont).            84   ...........  ..............          84 
                                                                        
    Michigan                                                            
     Biotechnol                                                         
     ogy                                                                
     Institute.         1,995   ...........         1,000    ...........
                                                                        
    Midwest                                                             
     Advanced                                                           
     Food                                                               
     Manufactur                                                         
     ing                                                                
     Alliance..           423   ...........           423           423 
    Midwest                                                             
     agricultur                                                         
     al                                                                 
     products                                                           
     (Iowa)....           592   ...........  ..............         592 
    Midwest                                                             
     feeds                                                              
     consortium           423   ...........  ..............  ...........
                                                                        
    Milk safety                                                         
     (Pennsylva                                                         
     nia)......           268   ...........  ..............         268 
                                                                        
    Minor use                                                           
     animal                                                             
     drugs (IR-                                                         
     4) \1\....  .............         550            550           550 
                                                                        
    Molluscan                                                           
     shellfish                                                          
     (Oregon)..           250   ...........  ..............         300 
                                                                        
    Multicommod                                                         
     ity                                                                
     research                                                           
     (Oregon)..           364   ...........  ..............         364 
                                                                        
    Multicroppi                                                         
     ng                                                                 
     strategies                                                         
     for                                                                
     aquacultur                                                         
     e (Hawaii)           127   ...........  ..............         127 
                                                                        
    National                                                            
     biological                                                         
     impact                                                             
     assessment           254          300            254    ...........
                                                                        
    Navajo                                                              
     Nation                                                             
     conservati                                                         
     on                                                                 
     (Arizona).            91   ...........  ..............  ...........
                                                                        
    Nematode                                                            
     resistance                                                         
     genetic                                                            
     engineerin                                                         
     g (New                                                             
     Mexico)...           127   ...........           127           127 
                                                                        
    Nonfood                                                             
     uses of                                                            
     agricultur                                                         
     al                                                                 
     products                                                           
     (Nebraska)            93   ...........  ..............          64 
    North                                                               
     central                                                            
     biotechnol                                                         
     ogy                                                                
     initiative         2,000   ...........         2,000    ...........
    Oil                                                                 
     resources                                                          
     from                                                               
     desert                                                             
     plants                                                             
     (New                                                               
     Mexico)...           169   ...........           169           169 
    Oregon-                                                             
     Massachuse                                                         
     tts-                                                               
     Pennsylvan                                                         
     ia                                                                 
     biotechnol                                                         
     ogy \2\...  .............  ...........  ..............  ...........
    Organic                                                             
     waste                                                              
     utilizatio                                                         
     n (New                                                             
     Mexico)...  .............  ...........           150    ...........
    Peach tree                                                          
     short life                                                         
     (South                                                             
     Carolina).           162   ...........  ..............         162 
    Perishable                                                          
     commoditie                                                         
     s                                                                  
     (Georgia).           212   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Pest                                                                
     control                                                            
     alternativ                                                         
     es (South                                                          
     Carolina).           106   ...........  ..............         106 
    Pesticide                                                           
     research                                                           
     (Washingto                                                         
     n)........           115   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Phytophthor                                                         
     a root rot                                                         
     (New                                                               
     Mexico)...           127   ...........           127           127 
    Preharvest                                                          
     food                                                               
     safety                                                             
     (Kansas)..  .............  ...........  ..............         212 
    Potato                                                              
     research..         1,214   ...........           638         1,214 
    Preservatio                                                         
     n and                                                              
     processing                                                         
     research                                                           
     (Oklahoma)           226   ...........  ..............         226 
    Procerum                                                            
     root                                                               
     disease                                                            
     (Virginia)            22   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Product                                                             
     Developmen                                                         
     t and                                                              
     Marketing                                                          
     Center                                                             
     (Maine)...           360   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Red River                                                           
     corridor                                                           
     (Minnesota                                                         
     , North                                                            
     Dakota)...           169   ...........           169           169 
    Regional                                                            
     barley                                                             
     gene                                                               
     mapping                                                            
     project...           348   ...........           348           348 
    Regionalize                                                         
     d                                                                  
     implicatio                                                         
     ns of farm                                                         
     programs                                                           
     (Missouri,                                                         
     Texas)....           294   ...........           294           294 
    Rural                                                               
     developmen                                                         
     t centers                                                          
     (Pennsylva                                                         
     nia, Iowa,                                                         
     North                                                              
     Dakota,                                                            
     Mississipp                                                         
     i, Oregon)           423          450            400           423 
    Rural                                                               
     environmen                                                         
     tal                                                                
     research                                                           
     (Illinois)            90   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Rural                                                               
     housing                                                            
     needs                                                              
     (Nebraska)            68   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Rural                                                               
     Policies                                                           
     Research                                                           
     Institute                                                          
     (Nebraska,                                                         
     Missouri).           644   ...........           322           644 
    Russian                                                             
     wheat                                                              
     aphid                                                              
     (Washingto                                                         
     n, Oregon,                                                         
     Idaho,                                                             
     California                                                         
     ,                                                                  
     Colorado).           455   ...........  ..............         455 
    Seafood and                                                         
     aquacultur                                                         
     e                                                                  
     harvesting                                                         
     ,                                                                  
     processing                                                         
     , and                                                              
     marketing                                                          
     (Mississip                                                         
     pi).......           305   ...........  ..............         305 
    Seafood                                                             
     research                                                           
     (Oregon)..           275   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Small fruit                                                         
     research                                                           
     (Oregon,                                                           
     Washington                                                         
     , Idaho)..           212   ...........           212           212 
    Soil and                                                            
     water                                                              
     (Ohio)....           169   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Southwest                                                           
     consortium                                                         
     for plant                                                          
     genetics                                                           
     and water                                                          
     resources.           338   ...........           338           338 
    Soybean                                                             
     bioprocess                                                         
     ing (Iowa)           277   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Soybean                                                             
     cyst                                                               
     nematode                                                           
     (Missouri)           303   ...........           303           303 
    STEEP--wate                                                         
     r quality                                                          
     in                                                                 
     Northwest.           829   ...........           500           829 
    Sunflower                                                           
     insects                                                            
     (North                                                             
     Dakota)...           127   ...........  ..............         127 
    Sustainable                                                         
     agricultur                                                         
     e                                                                  
     (Michigan)           445   ...........           445           445 
    Sustainable                                                         
     agricultur                                                         
     e and                                                              
     natural                                                            
     resources                                                          
     (Pennsylva                                                         
     nia)......            94   ...........  ..............          94 
    Sustainable                                                         
     agricultur                                                         
     e systems                                                          
     (Nebraska)            59   ...........  ..............          59 
    Swine                                                               
     research                                                           
     (Minnesota                                                         
     ).........           119   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Taxol                                                               
     cultivatio                                                         
     n                                                                  
     (Connectic                                                         
     ut).......            42   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Tillage,                                                            
     silvicultu                                                         
     re, waste                                                          
     management                                                         
     (Louisiana                                                         
     ).........           212   ...........           212           212 
    Tropical                                                            
     and                                                                
     subtropica                                                         
     l.........         2,809   ...........         2,809         2,809 
    Urban pests                                                         
     (Georgia).            64   ...........            64    ...........
    Value-added                                                         
     wheat                                                              
     (Kansas)..           212   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Viticulture                                                         
     consortium                                                         
     (New York,                                                         
     California                                                         
     ).........  .............  ...........           500    ...........
    Waste                                                               
     utilizatio                                                         
     n (North                                                           
     Carolina).           373   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Water                                                               
     conservati                                                         
     on                                                                 
     (Kansas)..            79   ...........            79            79 
    Water                                                               
     management                                                         
     (Alabama).           337   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Water                                                               
     quality \1                                                         
     \.........  .............       4,500          2,500         2,757 
    Weed                                                                
     control                                                            
     (North                                                             
     Dakota)...           423   ...........  ..............         423 
    Wheat                                                               
     genetic                                                            
     (Kansas)..           176   ...........           177           176 
    Wood                                                                
     utilizatio                                                         
     n (Oregon,                                                         
     Mississipp                                                         
     i,                                                                 
     Minnesota,                                                         
     North                                                              
     Carolina,                                                          
     Maine,                                                             
     Michigan).         3,758   ...........  ..............       3,758 
    Wool                                                                
     (Texas,                                                            
     Montana,                                                           
     Wyoming)..           212   ...........           212           212 
                                                                        
                --------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
      Total,                                                            
       special                                                          
       research                                                         
       grants..        46,060       15,050         31,930        40,670 
                                                                        
                ========================================================
                                                                        
Improved pest                                                           
 control:                                                               
    Integrated                                                          
     pest                                                               
     management                                                         
      \1\......  .............       7,000          3,093         2,731 
    Pesticide                                                           
     clearance                                                          
     (IR-4)....         5,711       15,000          6,711         5,711 
    Pesticide                                                           
     impact                                                             
     assessment                                                         
      \1\......  .............       2,968          1,795         1,327 
                                                                        
                --------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
      Total,                                                            
       improved                                                         
       pest                                                             
       control.         5,711       24,968         11,599         9,769 
                ========================================================
Competitive                                                             
 research                                                               
 grants:                                                                
    Plant                                                               
     systems...        37,000       47,000         37,355        37,000 
    Animal                                                              
     systems...        23,125       29,500         24,125        23,750 
    Nutrition,                                                          
     food                                                               
     quality,                                                           
     and health         7,400       11,000          7,400         7,400 
    Natural                                                             
     resources                                                          
     and the                                                            
     environmen                                                         
     t.........        16,650       27,000         17,650        20,497 
    Processes                                                           
     and new                                                            
     products..         6,935        9,000          6,935         6,935 
    Markets,                                                            
     trade, and                                                         
     policy....         3,700        6,500          4,700         4,000 
    Water                                                               
     quality...         4,708   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Integrated                                                          
     pest                                                               
     management                                                         
     and                                                                
     biocontrol         2,310   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Pesticide                                                           
     impact                                                             
     assessment         1,295   ...........  ..............  ...........
                --------------------------------------------------------
      Total,                                                            
       competit                                                         
       ive                                                              
       research                                                         
       grants..       103,123      130,000         98,165        99,582 
                ========================================================
Animal health                                                           
 and disease                                                            
 (sec. 1433)...         5,551        5,551          5,051         5,551 
Critical                                                                
 Agricultural                                                           
 Materials Act.           500   ...........  ..............         500 
Aquaculture                                                             
 centers (sec.                                                          
 1475).........         4,000        4,333          4,000         4,000 
Rangeland                                                               
 research                                                               
 grants (sec.                                                           
 1480).........           475          475            475           475 
Grants and                                                              
 contracts \3\.         8,990   ...........  ..............  ...........
Alternative                                                             
 crops \4\.....         1,318   ...........           500           500 
Low-input                                                               
 agriculture...         8,112        9,500          8,000         8,112 
Higher                                                                  
 education \2\.         8,850        7,500          8,850         8,850 
Capacity                                                                
 building                                                               
 grants........  .............      10,550   ..............       9,207 
Native American                                                         
 institutions..  .............      (4,600)        (4,600)       (4,600)
Advanced                                                                
 materials.....  .............       2,250            650    ...........
Federal                                                                 
 administration                                                         
 :                                                                      
    1890                                                                
     capacity                                                           
     building..         9,207   ...........  ..............  ...........
    Agricultura                                                         
     l                                                                  
     biotechnol                                                         
     ogy.......           349          400   ..............         349 
    Agriculture                                                         
     developmen                                                         
     t in the                                                           
     American                                                           
     Pacific...           564   ...........           564           564 
    Alternative                                                         
     fuels                                                              
     characteri                                                         
     zation                                                             
     laboratory                                                         
     (North                                                             
     Dakota)...           218   ...........  ..............         218 
    American                                                            
     Indian                                                             
     initiative/                                                        
     arid lands                                                         
     developmen                                                         
     t fund \2\  .............  ...........  ..............  ...........
    Center for                                                          
     Agricultur                                                         
     al and                                                             
     Rural                                                              
     Developmen                                                         
     t (Iowa)..           655   ...........  ..............         655 
    Center for                                                          
     North                                                              
     American                                                           
     Studies                                                            
     (Texas)...            87   ...........            87            87 
    Geographic                                                          
     informatio                                                         
     n system..           939   ...........  ..............         939 
    Herd                                                                
     management                                                         
     (Tennessee                                                         
     ).........           535   ...........  ..............         535 
    Mississippi                                                         
     Valley                                                             
     State                                                              
     University           583   ...........  ..............         583 
    National                                                            
     Potato                                                             
     Trade and                                                          
     Tariff                                                             
     Associatio                                                         
     n \2\.....  .............  ...........  ..............  ...........
    Office of                                                           
     Grants and                                                         
     Program                                                            
     Systems...           292          314            314           314 
    Pay costs                                                           
     and FERS..           480          551            451           551 
    Peer panels           227          500            300           350 
    PM-10 study                                                         
     (Washingto                                                         
     n,                                                                 
     California                                                         
     ).........           873   ...........           873           873 
    Rural                                                               
     partnershi                                                         
     p                                                                  
     (Nebraska)  .............  ...........  ..............         250 
    Shrimp                                                              
     aquacultur                                                         
     e (Hawaii,                                                         
     Mississipp                                                         
     i,                                                                 
     Arizona,                                                           
     Massachuse                                                         
     tts, South                                                         
     Carolina).         3,054   ...........         3,000         3,054 
    Vocational                                                          
     aquacultur                                                         
     e                                                                  
     education.           436   ...........  ..............         436 
    Water                                                               
     quality                                                            
     (Illinois)           492   ...........           700           492 
    Water                                                               
     quality                                                            
     (North                                                             
     Dakota)...           436   ...........  ..............         436 
                --------------------------------------------------------
      Total,                                                            
       Federal                                                          
       administ                                                         
       ration..        19,427        1,765          6,289        10,686 
                ========================================================
      Total,                                                            
       Cooperat                                                         
       ive                                                              
       State                                                            
       Research                                                         
       ,                                                                
       Educatio                                                         
       n, and                                                           
       Extensio                                                         
       n                                                                
       Service,                                                         
       research                                                         
       and                                                              
       educatio                                                         
       n                                                                
       activiti                                                         
       es......       432,387      432,212        389,172       418,172 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Included in grants and contracts for fiscal year 1995.              
\2\ Fiscal year 1995 funding rescinded by Public Law 104-19.            
\3\ For fiscal year 1995, includes $1,625,000 for global change;        
  $550,000 for minor use animal drugs; $1,327,000 for pesticide impact  
  assessment; $2,757,000 for water quality; and $2,731,000 for          
  integrated pest management.                                           
\4\ Fiscal year 1995 includes $500,000 for canola; $150,000 for         
  hesperaloe; and $668,000 for guayule.                                 

    Special research grants under Public Law 89-106.--The 
Committee recommends a total of $40,670,000. Specifics of 
individual grant allowances are included in the table above. 
Special items are discussed below.
    Aquaculture (Stoneville).--Of the $592,000 provided for 
this grant, the Committee recommends at least $90,000 for 
continued studies of the use of acoustics in aquaculture 
research to be conducted by the National Center for Physical 
Acoustics in cooperation with the Mississippi Agriculture and 
Forestry Experiment Station [MAFES] and the Delta Research and 
Extension Center in Stoneville.
    Global change.--The Committee supports continued funding at 
no more than the fiscal year 1995 level for the University of 
Missouri's climate and weather risk for agriculture project.
    Competitive research grants.--The Committee supports the 
National Research Initiative Competitive Grants Program [NRI] 
and recommends funding of $99,582,000.
    The Committee remains determined to see that quality 
research and enhanced human resources development in the 
agricultural and related sciences be a nationwide commitment. 
Therefore, the Committee continues its direction that 10 
percent of the competitive research grant funds be used for a 
USDA experimental program to stimulate competitive research 
[USDA-EPSCoR].
    Alternative crops.--The Committee recommends $500,000 for 
alternative crop research to continue research on canola.
    Sustainable agriculture.--The Committee recommends 
$8,112,000 for sustainable agriculture.
    The Committee supports the application of sustainable 
principles to the fragile ecosystems in Hawaii and the American 
Pacific and expects the Sustainable Agriculture Research and 
Education [SARE] Program to consider tropical agriculture and 
forestry proposals from the American Pacific region. Within 
available funds, the Committee expects SARE to fund those 
proposals judged meritorious when subjected to the established 
review process.
    Higher education.--The Committee recommends $8,850,000 for 
higher education. The Committee concurs with the House in 
providing $3,500,000 for graduate fellowships, $4,350,000 for 
challenge grants, and $1,000,000 for minority scholarships. Of 
the funds appropriated for the Challenge Grants Program, the 
Committee directs that $150,000 be made available to support 
the continuing operations of the food and agricultural 
education information system [FAEIS].
    Federal administration.--The Committee provides $10,686,000 
for Federal administration. The Committee's specific 
recommendations are reflected in the table above.
    For the geographic information system program, the 
Committee recommends $939,000, the same as the 1995 level. The 
Committee recommends the same amounts as in 1995 for each of 
the participating entities in Georgia, the Chesapeake Bay, 
Arkansas, North Dakota, Washington, and Wisconsin. Also, it is 
expected that program management costs will be kept to a 
minimum and any remaining funds will be distributed to the 
sites.

              NATIVE AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS ENDOWMENT FUND

Appropriations, 1995....................................................
Budget estimate, 1996...................................    ($4,600,000)
House allowance.........................................     (4,600,000)

Committee recommendation

                                                             (4,600,000)

    The Native American Institutions Endowment Fund authorized 
by Public Law 103-382 provides the first installment to 
establish an endowment for the 1994 land-grant institutions (29 
tribally controlled colleges). This program will enhance 
educational opportunity for Native Americans by building 
educational capacity at these institutions in the areas of 
student recruitment and retention, curricula development, 
faculty preparation, instruction delivery systems, and 
scientific instrumentation for teaching. On the termination of 
each fiscal year, the Secretary shall withdraw the income from 
the endowment fund for the fiscal year, and after making 
adjustments for the cost of administering the endowment fund, 
distribute the adjusted income as follows: 60 percent of the 
adjusted income from these funds shall be distributed among the 
1994 land-grant institutions on a pro rata basis, the 
proportionate share being based on the Indian student count; 
and 40 percent of the adjusted income shall be distributed in 
equal shares to the 1994 land-grant institutions.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Native American Institutions Endowment Fund, the 
Committee recommends $4,600,000, the same as the budget request 
and the House level. This is a newly authorized fund. No 
appropriation was provided for fiscal year 1995.

                        buildings and facilities

Appropriations, 1995.................................... \1\ $60,983,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................................
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                                              57,838,000

\1\ Reflects enacted rescission of $1,761,000.

    The CSREES ``Buildings and facilities'' account was 
established for the acquisition of land, construction, repair, 
improvement, extension, alteration, and purchase of fixed 
equipment or facilities which directly or indirectly support 
research and extension programs of the Department.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For buildings and facilities, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $57,838,000. This amount is $57,838,000 more 
than the House level and the budget estimate, and $3,145,000 
less than the 1995 amount.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's provisions:

                                            BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES                                            
                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          1995                                       Committee  
                 State and facility                  appropriation  1996 request  Houseallowance  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama: Poultry science facility, Auburn                                                                       
 University........................................        \1\ 522  ............  ..............          1,338 
Arkansas:                                                                                                       
    Agriculture building, University of Arkansas...          2,332  ............  ..............  ..............
    Alternative Pest Control Center, Carnall Hall..            946  ............  ..............          1,000 
California: Alternative Pest Control Containment                                                                
 and Quarantine Facility, University of California.          1,893  ............  ..............          1,876 
Colorado: Animal Reproduction and Biotechnology                                                                 
 Laboratory, Colorado State University.............          1,231  ............  ..............  ..............
Connecticut:                                                                                                    
    Agricultural biotechnology building, University                                                             
     of Connecticut................................            568  ............  ..............          1,347 
    Chemistry building, Connecticut Agricultural                                                                
     Experiment Station............................        ( \1\ )  ............  ..............  ..............
Delaware: Poultry Biocontainment Laboratory........          1,420  ............  ..............          1,751 
Florida: Aquatic research facility, University of                                                               
 Florida...........................................        ( \1\ )  ............  ..............          1,500 
Georgia: Biocontainment Research Center, University                                                             
 of Georgia, Athens................................          2,396  ............  ..............  ..............
Hawaii: Center for Applied Aquaculture.............          1,495  ............  ..............  ..............
Idaho: Biotechnology facility, University of Idaho.        ( \2\ )  ............  ..............          1,181 
Illinois:                                                                                                       
    Biotechnology Center, Northwestern University..          3,218  ............  ..............          1,366 
    Science facility, DePaul University............        \1\ 435  ............  ..............  ..............
Kentucky: Applied Research and Manpower Training                                                                
 Center............................................            897  ............  ..............  ..............
Louisiana: Southeast research station, Franklinton.        ( \1\ )  ............  ..............          1,280 
Maryland: Institute for Natural Resources and                                                                   
 Environmental Science, University of Maryland.....          1,893  ............  ..............          2,288 
Massachusetts: Center for Hunger, Poverty,                                                                      
 Nutrition, and Policy, Tufts University...........          2,461  ............  ..............          1,641 
Mississippi:                                                                                                    
    Center for Water and Wetland Resources,                                                                     
     University of Mississippi.....................          1,420  ............  ..............          1,555 
    National Food Service Management Institute.....        ( \1\ )  ............  ..............          3,000 
Missouri: Center for Plant Biodiversity, St. Louis.            757  ............  ..............          3,995 
Montana: Bioscience Research Laboratory, Montana                                                                
 State University..................................          2,608  ............  ..............  ..............
Nevada: Great Basin Environmental Research                                                                      
 Laboratory, University of Nevada..................        ( \1\ )  ............  ..............  ..............
New Jersey: Plant bioscience facility, Rutgers                                                                  
 University........................................          3,785  ............  ..............          2,262 
New Mexico: Center for Arid Land Studies, New                                                                   
 Mexico State University...........................          1,420  ............  ..............          1,464 
New York: New York Botanical Garden................          3,785  ............  ..............          1,665 
North Carolina: Bowman-Gray Center, Wake Forest....          2,672  ............  ..............          3,000 
North Dakota: Institute for Agriculture and Rural                                                               
 Health Research Development, Minot State                                                                       
 University........................................          2,600  ............  ..............  ..............
Ohio: Lake Erie Soil and Water Research and                                                                     
 Education Center..................................            229  ............  ..............  ..............
Oklahoma:                                                                                                       
    Beef cattle research facility..................            375                                              
    Grain Storage Research and Extension Center,                                                                
     Oklahoma State University.....................        ( \1\ )  ............  ..............            495 
Oregon:                                                                                                         
    Forest Ecosystem Research Laboratory, Oregon                                                                
     State University..............................        ( \1\ )  ............  ..............          5,000 
    Regional Food Innovation Center................          2,397  ............  ..............  ..............
Pennsylvania: Center for Food Marketing, St.                                                                    
 Joseph's University...............................          2,366  ............  ..............          2,438 
Rhode Island: Coastal Institute on Narragauset Bay,                                                             
 University of Rhode Island........................          2,702  ............  ..............          3,854 
South Dakota: Animal resource wing, South Dakota                                                                
 State University..................................        ( \1\ )  ............  ..............          2,700 
Tennessee:                                                                                                      
    Agriculture, biological, and environmental                                                                  
     research complex, University of Tennessee.....          2,366  ............  ..............          1,928 
    Horse Science and Teaching Center, Middle                                                                   
     Tennessee State University....................        ( \1\ )  ............  ..............  ..............
    Nursery crop research station, Tennessee State                                                              
     University....................................             88  ............  ..............  ..............
Texas:                                                                                                          
    Southern crop improvement, Texas A&M...........;            508  ............  ..............          1,400 
    Biocontainment facility, Texas A&M.............;        ( \1\ )  ............  ..............  ..............
Utah: Biotechnology Laboratory, Utah State                                                                      
 University........................................            387  ............  ..............  ..............
Vermont: Rural Community Interactive Learning                                                                   
 Center, University of Vermont.....................        ( \1\ )  ............  ..............          2,000 
Washington:                                                                                                     
    Animal disease biotechnology facility,                                                                      
     Washington State University...................          4,172  ............  ..............          1,263 
    Wheat research facility, Washington State                                                                   
     University....................................        \1\ 426  ............  ..............          3,251 
Wisconsin: College of Natural Resources, University                                                             
 of Wisconsin, Stevens Point.......................          2,761  ............  ..............  ..............
Wyoming: Environmental simulation facility,                                                                     
 University of Wyoming.............................          1,182  ............  ..............  ..............
Miscellaneous: Fund for feasibility studies........            270  ............  ..............  ..............
                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, CSRS construction.....................         60,983  ............  ..............         57,838 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Feasibility study requested.                                                                                
\2\ Funding of $1,761,000 rescinded by Public Law 104-19.                                                       


    Facilities funded by this appropriation shall be based on a 
matching formula of not to exceed 50 percent Federal and not 
less than 50 percent non-Federal funding, including amounts 
received from private sources and from local units of 
government. Matching requirements shall be based on cash rather 
than in-kind contributions for any facility, except a facility 
which received initial funding prior to fiscal year 1994. 
Construction of such facilities shall be based on a firm 
indication of local support, including a commitment for paying 
all operating costs (including the total research program) of 
the facility. Institutions must document availability of all 
non-Federal matching funds prior to the release of Federal 
funds. Further, the research programs to be carried out at 
these facilities shall be complimentary to the overall programs 
of the Department of Agriculture.
    The Committee notes that its recommendation will complete 
the Federal matching share for 10 facilities initiated under 
this program. This will avoid potential additional Federal 
costs from deferred funding of these projects. The Committee 
has provided $1,000,000 for the final phase of the Carnall Hall 
project at the University of Arkansas. Due to budgetary 
constraints, the funds provided for this project may be 
redirected to complete another project initiated under this 
program at the University of Arkansas, if that project is 
determined to be of higher priority.

                          extension activities

Appropriations, 1995 \1\................................    $438,744,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     437,552,000
House allowance.........................................     413,257,000
Committee recommendation................................     437,131,000

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, funds appropriated for the EEO counseling function are excluded. 
These funds are included with the Office of Civil Rights Enforcement 
under the departmental administration appropriation. On a comparable 
basis, USDA estimates fiscal year 1995 appropriations of $438,737,000.

    Cooperative extension work was established by the Smith-
Lever Act of May 8, 1914, as amended. Legislation authorizes 
the Department of Agriculture to provide, through the land-
grant colleges, cooperative extension work that consists of the 
development of practical applications of research knowledge and 
the giving of instruction and practical demonstrations of 
existing or improved practices or technologies in agriculture, 
uses of solar energy with respect to agriculture, home 
economics, related subjects, and to encourage the application 
of such information by demonstrations, publications, through 4-
H clubs, and other means to persons not attending or resident 
in the colleges.
    To fulfill the requirements of the Smith-Lever Act, State 
and county extension offices in each State, the District of 
Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American 
Samoa, the Northern Marianas, and Micronesia conduct 
educational programs to improve American agriculture and 
strengthen the Nation's families and communities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For extension activities of the Cooperative State Research, 
Education, and Extension Service, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $437,131,000. This amount is $23,874,000 more 
than the House level, $1,613,000 less than the amount provided 
for 1995, and $421,000 less than the budget estimate.
    The following table summarizes Committee action on 
extension activities:

       EXTENSION ACTIVITIES--FISCAL YEAR 1996 CONGRESSIONAL ACTION      
                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Fiscal year                                          
                       1995     Fiscal year     House        Committee  
                     enacted    1996 budget   allowance   recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smith-Lever                                                             
 sections 3(b)                                                          
 and 3(c)........      272,582      272,582      264,405        272,582 
Smith-Lever                                                             
 section 3(d):                                                          
    Food safety..        2,475        2,475        2,400          2,475 
    Youth at risk       10,000       10,000        9,700         10,000 
    Water quality       11,234       11,234       10,897         11,234 
    Food and                                                            
     nutrition                                                          
     education...       61,431       61,431       59,588         61,431 
    Pesticide                                                           
     applicator                                                         
     training....  ...........        2,000  ...........  ..............
    Pest                                                                
     management..       10,947       15,000       10,947         10,947 
    Farm safety..        2,988          988        2,898          2,988 
    Pesticide                                                           
     impact                                                             
     assessment..        3,363        3,363        3,363          3,363 
    Rural                                                               
     development                                                        
     centers.....          950          950          921            950 
    Indian                                                              
     reservation                                                        
     agents......        1,750        1,750        1,697          1,750 
    Nutrition                                                           
     education                                                          
     initiative..        4,265        4,265  ...........          4,265 
    Sustainable                                                         
     agriculture.        3,463        4,963        3,463          3,463 
Renewable                                                               
 Resources                                                              
 Extension Act...        3,341        3,341        3,241          3,341 
1890 colleges and                                                       
 Tuskegee........       25,472       26,236       24,708         25,472 
1890's facilities                                                       
 grants..........        7,901        7,901        7,664          7,901 
Agricultural                                                            
 communications..        1,221        1,221        1,184          1,221 
Rural health and                                                        
 safety education        2,750        2,750  ...........          2,750 
                  ------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...      426,133      432,450      407,076        426,133 
                  ======================================================
Federal                                                                 
 administration                                                         
 and special                                                            
 grants:                                                                
    General                                                             
     administrati                                                       
     on..........        5,241        5,102        4,924          5,102 
    Agricultural                                                        
     plastics                                                           
     (Vermont)...          100  ...........  ...........  ..............
    Beef                                                                
     producers                                                          
     improvement                                                        
     (Arkansas)..          200  ...........  ...........            200 
    Chinch bug/                                                         
     Russian                                                            
     wheat aphid                                                        
     (Nebraska)..           67  ...........  ...........  ..............
    Cranberry                                                           
     development                                                        
     (Maine).....           50  ...........  ...........  ..............
    Delta                                                               
     Teachers                                                           
     Academy.....        3,935  ...........  ...........          3,935 
    Extension                                                           
     specialist                                                         
     (Arkansas)..          100  ...........  ...........            100 
    Income                                                              
     enhancement                                                        
     demonstratio                                                       
     n (Ohio)....          250  ...........          243  ..............
    Integrated                                                          
     cow/calf                                                           
     management                                                         
     (Iowa)......          350  ...........  ...........            350 
    Pilot                                                               
     technology                                                         
     project                                                            
     (Wisconsin).          165  ...........          160  ..............
    Pilot                                                               
     technology                                                         
     transfer                                                           
     (Oklahoma                                                          
     and                                                                
     Mississippi)          331  ...........  ...........            331 
    Range                                                               
     improvement                                                        
     (New Mexico)          200  ...........          194  ..............
    Rural Center                                                        
     for HIV/STD                                                        
     Prevention                                                         
     (Indiana)...          250  ...........          243  ..............
    Rural                                                               
     development                                                        
     (Nebraska)..          392  ...........  ...........            200 
    Rural                                                               
     development                                                        
     (New Mexico)          230  ...........          223            230 
    Rural                                                               
     development                                                        
     (Oklahoma)..          300  ...........  ...........            300 
    Rural                                                               
     rehabilitati                                                       
     on (Georgia)          250  ...........  ...........            250 
    Wood biomass                                                        
     as an                                                              
     alternative                                                        
     farm product                                                       
     (New York)..          200  ...........          194  ..............
                  ------------------------------------------------------
        Subtotal,                                                       
         Federal                                                        
         administ                                                       
         ration..       12,611        5,102        6,181         10,998 
                  ------------------------------------------------------
        Total,                                                          
         Extensio                                                       
         n                                                              
         Service.      438,744      437,552      413,257        437,131 
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    The Committee recommends $3,463,000 for sustainable 
agricultural activities authorized by sections 1628 and 1629 of 
the 1990 farm bill. The Committee expects all funds to be 
awarded through competition open to all entities with 
demonstrable expertise.
    The Committee recommends $2,750,000, the same as the fiscal 
year 1995 level and budget request, for rural health and safety 
education. Included in this amount is $2,250,000 for the 
ongoing rural health program in Mississippi to train health 
care professionals to serve in rural areas, and $500,000 for 
the ongoing rural health and outreach initiative in Louisiana.
    Of the funds recommended for farm safety, the Committee 
includes $2,000,000 for the Agrability project being carried 
out in cooperation with the National Easter Seal Society.

  Office of Assistant Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs

Appropriations, 1995....................................        $605,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     \1\ 625,000
House allowance.........................................         605,000
Committee recommendation................................         605,000

\1\ The 1996 budget proposed that this office be funded in a single 
account under the Office of the Secretary.

    The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Marketing and 
Regulatory Programs provides direction and coordination in 
carrying out laws enacted by the Congress with respect to the 
Department's marketing, grading, and standardization related to 
grain; competitive marketing practices of livestock, marketing 
orders, and various programs; veterinary services; and plant 
protection and quarantine. The Office has oversight and 
management responsibilities for the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service; Agricultural Marketing Service; and Grain 
Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Marketing and 
Regulatory Programs, the Committee recommends an appropriation 
of $605,000. This is $20,000 less than the budget request, and 
the same as the House and 1995 levels.

               Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

                         salaries and expenses

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Appropriations     User fees          Total     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995                                                    
 \1\.................     $346,991,000    ($96,660,000)   ($443,651,000)
Budget estimate, 1996      330,025,000    (100,254,000)    (430,279,000)
House allowance......      333,410,000    (100,254,000)    (433,664,000)
Committee                                                               
 recommendation......      329,125,000    (100,254,000)    (429,379,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of     
  1994, funds appropriated for preharvest pathogen reduction and        
  salmonella enteritidis are excluded. These funds are included under   
  the ``Food Safety and Inspection Service'' account. Funds appropriated
  for civil rights enforcement are excluded. On a comparable basis, USDA
  estimates fiscal year 1995 appropriations of $340,496,000.            


    The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [APHIS] was 
established by the Secretary of Agriculture on April 2, 1972, 
under the authority of Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953, and 
other authorities. The major objectives of APHIS are to protect 
the animal and plant resources of the Nation from diseases and 
pests. These objectives are carried out under the major areas 
of activity, as follows:
    Pest and disease exclusion.--The Agency conducts inspection 
and quarantine activities at U.S. ports of entry to prevent the 
introduction of exotic animal and plant diseases and pests. The 
Agency also participates in inspection, survey, and control 
activities in foreign countries to reinforce its domestic 
activities.
    Agricultural quarantine inspection.--User fees are 
collected to cover the cost of inspection and quarantine 
activities at U.S. ports of entry to prevent the introduction 
of exotic animal and plant diseases and pests.
    Plant and animal health monitoring.--The Agency conducts 
programs to assess animal and plant health and to detect 
endemic and exotic diseases and pests.
    Pest and disease management programs.--The Agency carries 
out programs to control and eradicate pest infestations and 
animal diseases that threaten the United States; reduce 
agricultural losses caused by predatory animals, birds, and 
rodents; provide technical assistance to other cooperators such 
as States, counties, farmer or rancher groups, and foundations; 
and ensure compliance with interstate movement and other 
disease control regulations within the jurisdiction of the 
Agency.
    Animal care.--The Agency conducts regulatory activities 
which ensure the humane care and treatment of animals and 
horses as required by the Animal Welfare and Horse Protection 
Acts. These activities include inspection of certain 
establishments which handle animals intended for research, 
exhibition, and as pets, and monitoring of certain horse shows.
    Scientific and technical services.--The Agency performs 
other regulatory activities, including the development of 
standards for the licensing and testing of veterinary 
biologicals to ensure their safety and effectiveness; 
diagnostic activities in support of the control and eradication 
programs in other functional components; applied research aimed 
at reducing economic damage from vertebrate animals; 
development of new pest and animal damage control methods and 
tools; and regulatory oversight of genetically engineered 
products.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For salaries and expenses of the Animal and Plant Health 
Service, the Committee recommends total funding of 
$429,379,000. This is $900,000 less than the budget request, 
$14,272,000 less than the 1995 appropriation, and $4,285,000 
less than the House level.
    The following table reflects the Committee's specific 
recommendations for the Animal Plant Health Inspection Service:

                                   ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE                                   
                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Fiscal year                                           
                                                             1995       Fiscal year     House        Committee  
                                                        appropriations  1996 budget   allowance   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pest and disease exclusion:                                                                                     
    Agricultural quarantine inspection................         25,410        24,914       24,914         24,914 
    User fees.........................................         96,660       100,254      100,254        100,254 
                                                       ---------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, agricultural quarantine inspection....        121,800       125,168      125,168        125,168 
                                                       =========================================================
    Foot-and-mouth disease............................          3,995         4,027        3,991          3,991 
    Import/export inspection..........................          6,535         6,559        6,528          6,528 
    International programs............................          6,106         6,122        6,100          6,100 
    Mediterranean fruit fly exclusion.................         10,809        10,114       10,079         10,079 
    Mexican fruit fly exclusion.......................          2,156         2,193        2,153          2,153 
    Screwworm.........................................         34,029        33,969       33,969         33,969 
                                                       ---------------------------------------------------------
      Total, pest and disease exclusion...............        184,710       188,152      187,988        187,988 
                                                       =========================================================
Plant and animal health monitoring:                                                                             
    Animal health monitoring and surveil- lance.......         59,381        59,276       59,276         59,276 
    Animal and plant health regulatory enforcement....          5,865         5,855        5,855          5,855 
    Fruit fly detection...............................          3,923         3,937        3,919          3,923 
    Pest detection....................................          4,206         4,586        4,202          4,206 
                                                       ---------------------------------------------------------
      Total, plant and health monitoring..............         73,375        73,654       73,252         73,260 
                                                       =========================================================
Pest and disease management programs:                                                                           
    Animal damage control operations..................         26,592        20,297       26,566         26,642 
    Aquaculture.......................................            493           413          413            493 
    Biocontrol........................................          7,504         6,290        7,497          6,290 
    Boll weevil.......................................         18,084        11,016       18,066         18,084 
    Brucellosis eradication...........................         27,781        21,580       24,663         21,580 
    Cattle ticks......................................          4,578         3,837        3,837          4,537 
    Golden nematode...................................            615           435          435            435 
    Grasshopper and mormon cricket....................  ..............        2,524  ...........  ..............
    Gypsy moth........................................          5,177         4,367        4,367          4,367 
    Imported fire ant.................................          1,500   ...........        1,000          1,000 
    Miscellaneous plant diseases......................          1,988         1,516        1,516          1,516 
    Noxious weeds.....................................            404           338          338            338 
    Pink bollworm.....................................          1,069           901        1,068          1,069 
    Preharvest program................................          2,800   ...........  ...........  ..............
    Pseudorabies......................................          4,543         2,863        4,543          4,543 
    Salmonella enteritidis............................          3,384   ...........  ...........  ..............
    Scrapie...........................................          2,969         2,172        2,967          2,172 
    Sweet potato whitefly.............................          2,400         2,012        2,398          2,400 
    Tropical bont tick................................            537           452          537            452 
    Tuberculosis......................................          5,499         4,609        4,609          4,609 
    Witchweed.........................................          1,975         1,663        1,663          1,663 
                                                       ---------------------------------------------------------
      Total, pest and disease management..............        119,892        87,285      106,483        102,190 
                                                       =========================================================
Animal care:                                                                                                    
    Animal welfare....................................          9,262         9,185        9,185          9,185 
    Horse protection..................................            362           363          362            362 
                                                       ---------------------------------------------------------
      Total, animal care..............................          9,624         9,548        9,547          9,547 
                                                       =========================================================
Scientific and technical services:                                                                              
    Animal damage control methods development.........          9,681         9,665        9,665          9,665 
    Biotechnology/environmental protection............          7,690         7,677        7,677          7,677 
    Integrated systems acquisition project............          3,500         4,055        4,055          4,055 
    Plant methods development labs....................          5,059         5,084        5,053          5,053 
    Veterinary biologics..............................         10,371        10,392       10,360         10,360 
    Veterinary diagnostics............................         14,811        14,785       14,785         14,785 
                                                       ---------------------------------------------------------
      Total, scientific and technical services........         51,112        51,658       51,595         51,595 
                                                       =========================================================
Contingency fund......................................          4,938        19,982        4,799          4,799 
                                                       ---------------------------------------------------------
      Total, salaries and expenses....................        443,651       430,279      433,664        429,379 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Agricultural quarantine inspection [AQI].--The Committee 
concurs with the House in including bill language proposed by 
the administration allowing amounts in the AQI ``User fee'' 
account to be available for authorized purposes without further 
appropriation in fiscal year 1996. The Committee expects that 
the availability of these additional funds will help to address 
staffing and equipment needs at major airports, including 
Florida and Hawaii. The Committee is concerned that 
preclearance inspection staffing shortages in San Juan, Puerto 
Rico, and Hawaii may threaten domestic agricultural production. 
The Committee encourages the Department to continue to ensure 
that pest risks from Puerto Rico and Hawaii are addressed.
    The Committee encourages the Department to continue to 
explore new technologies for AQI inspection and to explore new 
staffing methods at high-volume inspection sites to maximize 
efficiency.
    The Committee also encourages the Department to continue to 
seek procedural and/or treatment methods that allow for market 
expansion of Hawaiian agricultural products to the continental 
United States while negating pest risks to the mainland.
    Animal damage control.--The Committee concurs with the 
House in encouraging cost sharing of control activities.
    The Committee maintains funds for cattail management, for 
blackbird control, and for a cooperative agreement with the 
Hawaiian Sugar Planters Association for rodent control in 
sugarcane and macadamia nut crops. Funding is also included for 
continuation of a pilot program for blackbird control in 
Evangeline and Vermilion Parishes in Louisiana and the 
Committee encourages the program's expansion into Allen, 
Calcasieu, Cameron, Jeff Davis, Acadia, and St. Landry 
Parishes.
    The Committee has included an increase of $75,000 to help 
address the tremendous growth in the beaver population in 
Mississippi.
    The Committee also includes funding to continue depredation 
efforts on fish-eating birds and other species which cause 
damage to the commercial fish industry in the Midsouth.
    The Committee expects APHIS to maintain the Vermont animal 
damage control State office.
    In addition, funding is included for the Jack H. Berryman 
Institute for Wildlife Damage Management.
    Boll weevil.--Included in the total amount provided for the 
boll weevil eradication program, the Committee provides not 
less than $400,000 to continue the geographic information 
system to prepare for future expansion of the program into 
remaining cotton production regions that have not eradicated 
the boll weevil. The technology developed through this system 
will be transferred to these regions as the program expands, 
reducing overall program costs.
    The Committee is concerned that the failure of the Mexican 
Government to provide sufficient funds for boll weevil 
suppression activities in Mexico may diminish the effectiveness 
of boll weevil eradication efforts in south Texas. The 
Committee urges APHIS to investigate and report its 
recommendations to address this situation to the Committee.
    Imported fire ant.--The Committee recommends $200,000, the 
same as in 1995, for ongoing work at the University of Arkansas 
at Monticello for fire ant control methods and dissemination of 
information to the public.
    Mexican avocados.--The Committee does not concur with House 
report language regarding the regulation of importation of 
Mexican avocados. The Department published regulations to 
address concerns about the protection of domestic avocado 
production after House action on this issue.
    Noxious weeds.--The Committee encourages the Department to 
continue its efforts to eradicate Orobanche ramosa in Texas. 
The Department also is encouraged to continue its efforts to 
address outbreaks of tropical soda apple in the Southeast.
    Preharvest program.--The Committee is aware of the work 
being done by the food animal production medicine consortium 
and expects the agency to coordinate its preharvest food safety 
efforts with the research being conducted by the consortium.
    Tuberculosis.--The Committee recognizes the importance of 
the Bovine Tuberculosis Eradication Program administered by 
APHIS in preventing and confining additional outbreaks of 
bovine tuberculosis. Given the recent finding of bovine 
tuberculosis [TB] in a heifer shipped to Wisconsin--an 
accredited TB-free State--the Committee expects APHIS to 
expeditiously isolate the source of this infection. APHIS 
should complete the epidemiology as soon as possible to 
determine the extent of further exposure or infection of 
additional animals in the State and conduct necessary 
eradication activities as necessary to maintain Wisconsin's 
accredited TB-free status.
    Horse protection.--The Committee concurs with the House in 
its expectation that USDA work with horse industry 
organizations to improve the enforcement of the Horse 
Protection Act by enhancing the regulatory responsibilities of 
the USDA-certified organizations. The Committee also expects 
APHIS to provide a report to the Committee regarding its 
progress in achieving this objectives and any associated 
savings to APHIS by February 1, 1996.

                        buildings and facilities

Appropriations, 1995....................................  \1\ $4,973,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      12,541,000
House allowance.........................................      12,541,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,973,000

\1\ Reflects enacted rescission of $2,000,000.

    The APHIS appropriation ``Buildings and facilities'' funds 
major nonrecurring construction projects in support of specific 
program activities and recurring construction, alterations, 
preventive maintenance, and repairs of existing APHIS 
facilities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For buildings and facilities of the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service, the Committee recommends an appropriation 
of $4,973,000. This amount is the same as the 1995 
appropriation, and $7,568,000 less than the House and budget 
request levels.

                     Agricultural Marketing Service

                           marketing services

Appropriations, 1995 \1\................................     $56,591,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      50,607,000
House allowance.........................................      46,662,000
Committee recommendation................................      46,517,000

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, funds appropriated for egg products inspection are excluded. These 
funds are included under the ``Food Safety and Inspection Service'' 
account. On a comparable basis, USDA estimates fiscal year 1995 
appropriations of $46,166,000.

    The Agricultural Marketing Service was established by the 
Secretary of Agriculture on April 2, 1972. AMS carries out 
programs authorized by some 31 different statutory authorities, 
the primary ones being the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 
(7 U.S.C. 1621-1627); the U.S. Cotton Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 
51-65); the Cotton Statistics and Estimates Act (7 U.S.C. 471-
476); the Tobacco Inspection Act (7 U.S.C. 511-511q); the 
Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (7 U.S.C. 499a-499s); 
the Egg Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 1031-1056); and 
section 32 (15 U.S.C. 713c).
    Programs administered by this Agency include the market 
news services, payments to States for marketing activities, the 
Plant Variety Protection Act, the Federal administration of 
marketing agreements and orders, standardization, grading, 
classing, and shell egg surveillance services, transportation 
services, and market protection and promotion.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For marketing services, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $46,517,000. This amount is $10,074,000 less 
than the amount provided in 1995, $4,090,000 less than the 
budget request, and $145,000 less than the House level.
    The Committee provides the $351,000 requested in the budget 
to offset increased Federal costs and State reimbursements to 
fulfill temperature requirements of the Egg Products Inspection 
Act. The Committee expects the Service to continue 
implementation of the organic certification program within 
available funds.

                 limitation on administrative expenses

Limitation, 1995........................................   ($57,054,000)
Budget limitation, 1996.................................    (58,461,000)
House allowance.........................................    (58,461,000)

Committee recommendation

                                                            (58,461,000)

    The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (Public Law 
97-35) initiated a system of user fees for the cost of grading 
and classing tobacco, cotton, naval stores, and for warehouse 
examination. These activities, authorized under the U.S. Cotton 
Standards Act, the Tobacco Inspection Act, the Naval Stores 
Act, the U.S. Warehouse Act, and other provisions of law are 
designed to facilitate commerce and to protect participants in 
the industry.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a limitation on administrative 
expenses of the Agricultural Marketing Service of $58,461,000. 
This amount is $1,407,000 more than the 1995 level, and the 
same as the House level and the budget request.

          funds for strengthening markets, income, and supply

                              (section 32)

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $10,309,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      10,451,000
House allowance.........................................      10,451,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              10,451,000

    Under section 32 of the act of August 24, 1935, (7 U.S.C. 
612c), an amount equal to 30 percent of customs receipts 
collected during each preceding calendar year and unused 
balances are available for encouraging the domestic consumption 
and exportation of agricultural commodities. An amount equal to 
30 percent of receipts collected on fishery products is 
transferred to the Department of Commerce. Additional transfers 
to the child nutrition programs of the Food and Consumer 
Service have been provided in recent appropriation acts.
    The following table reflects the status of this fund for 
fiscal years 1994-96:

SECTION 32 ESTIMATED TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE AND BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD--
                          FISCAL YEARS 1994-96                          
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Fiscal year--                   
                   -----------------------------------------------------
                                        1995 current      1996 current  
                       1994 actual        estimate          estimate    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations (30                                                      
 percent of                                                             
 customs receipts)    $5,355,068,525    $5,795,222,663    $6,263,764,062
Less transfers:                                                         
    Food and                                                            
     Nutrition                                                          
     Service......    -4,770,109,000    -5,249,077,000    -5,597,858,000
    Commerce                                                            
     Department...       -61,944,127       -64,765,383       -72,893,162
                   -----------------------------------------------------
      Total,                                                            
       transfers..    -4,832,053,127    -5,313,842,383    -5,670,751,162
                   =====================================================
Budget authority..       523,015,398       481,380,280       670,378,900
Unobligated                                                             
 balance                                                                
 available:                                                             
    Start of year.       246,300,847       245,951,017       147,444,297
    Recoveries of                                                       
     prior year                                                         
     obligations..        20,804,713  ................  ................
                   -----------------------------------------------------
      Available                                                         
       for                                                              
       obligation.       790,120,958       727,331,297       740,457,197
                   =====================================================
Less obligations:                                                       
    Commodity                                                           
     procurement:                                                       
        Child                                                           
         nutrition                                                      
         purchases       399,713,755       400,000,000       400,000,000
        Emergency                                                       
         surplus                                                        
         removal..        78,451,603        97,600,000  ................
        Disaster                                                        
         relief...         3,463,455           480,000  ................
        Sunflower                                                       
         oil and                                                        
         cottonsee                                                      
         d oil                                                          
         purchases        50,000,000        25,650,000        23,900,000
                   -----------------------------------------------------
            Total,                                                      
             commo                                                      
             dity                                                       
             procu                                                      
             remen                                                      
             t....       531,628,813       523,730,000       423,900,000
                   =====================================================
Administrative                                                          
 funds:                                                                 
    Commodity                                                           
     purchase                                                           
     service......         4,422,834         6,098,000         6,106,000
    Marketing,                                                          
     agreements,                                                        
     and orders...         8,118,294        10,309,000        10,451,000
                   -----------------------------------------------------
      Total,                                                            
       administrat                                                      
       ive funds..        12,541,128        16,407,000        16,557,000
                   -----------------------------------------------------
      Total,                                                            
       direct                                                           
       obligations       544,169,941       579,887,000       440,457,000
          Unobliga                                                      
           ted                                                          
           balance                                                      
           availab                                                      
           le, end                                                      
           of year       245,951,017       147,444,297       300,000,197
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a transfer from section 32 funds 
of $10,451,000 for the formulation and administration of 
marketing agreements and orders. This amount is the same as the 
budget estimate and 1995 House level, and $142,000 more than 
the 1995 amount.

                   payments to states and possessions

Appropriations, 1995....................................      $1,200,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................       1,200,000
House allowance.........................................       1,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               1,200,000

    The Federal-State Marketing Improvement Program is 
authorized by section 204(b) of the Agricultural Marketing Act 
of 1946 and is also funded from appropriations. Payments are 
made to State marketing agencies to: identify and test market 
alternative farm commodities; determine methods of providing 
more reliable market information, and develop better commodity 
grading standards. This program has made possible many types of 
projects, such as electronic marketing and agricultural product 
diversification. Current projects are focused on the 
improvement of marketing efficiency and effectiveness, and 
seeking new outlets for existing farm produced commodities. The 
legislation grants the U.S. Department of Agriculture authority 
to establish cooperative agreements with State departments of 
agriculture or similar State agencies to improve the efficiency 
of the agricultural marketing chain. The States perform the 
work or contract it to others, and must contribute at least 
one-half of the cost of the projects.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For payments to States and possessions for Federal-State 
marketing projects and activities, the Committee provides 
$1,200,000. This amount is $200,000 more than the House level, 
and the same as the budget request and the 1995 level.
    The Committee is aware of the need to evaluate electronic 
marketing advances in disseminating market information, 
reducing marketing costs, and developing new markets for unique 
tropical agricultural products from Hawaii. The Committee 
encourages the Department to consider developing a cooperative 
agreement with the Hawaii Department of Agriculture for this 
purpose.

        Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 1995 \1\................................     $23,314,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      23,679,000
House allowance.........................................      23,058,000
Committee recommendation................................      23,289,000

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, funds appropriated to the Federal Grain Inspection Service and the 
Packers and Stockyards Administration are merged together to form the 
new Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration. Funds 
appropriated for civil rights enforcement are excluded. On a comparable 
basis, USDA estimates fiscal year 1995 appropriations of $23,289,000.

    The Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration 
[GIPSA] was established pursuant to the Secretary's 1994 
reorganization. GIPSA consolidates the activities of the former 
Federal Grain Inspection Service and the Packers and Stockyards 
Administration. Grain inspection and weighing programs are 
carried out under the U.S. Grain Standards Act and other 
programs under the authority of the Agricultural Marketing Act 
of 1946, including the inspection and grading of rice and 
grain-related products; conducting official weighing and grain 
inspection activities; and grading, dry beans and peas, and 
processed grain products. Under the Packers and Stockyard Act, 
assurance of the financial integrity of the livestock, meat, 
and poultry markets is provided. The administration monitors 
competition in order to protect producers, consumers, and 
industry from deceptive and fraudulent practices which affect 
meat and poultry prices.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For salaries and expenses of the Grain Inspection, Packers 
and Stockyards Administration, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $23,289,000. This amount is $231,000 more than 
the House level, $390,000 less than the budget request, and 
$25,000 less than the amount provided for 1995.

        limitation on inspection and weighing services expenses

Limitation, 1995........................................   ($42,784,000)
Budget limitation, 1996.................................    (42,784,000)
House allowance.........................................    (42,784,000)

Committee recommendation

                                                            (42,784,000)

    The Agency provides an official grain inspection and 
weighing system under the U.S. Grain Standards Act [USGSA], and 
official inspection of rice and grain-related products under 
the Agricultural Marketing Act [AMA] of 1946. The USGSA was 
amended in 1981 to require the collection of user fees to fund 
the costs associated with the operation, supervision, and 
administration of Federal grain inspection and weighing 
activities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a $42,784,000 limitation on 
inspection and weighing services expenses. This amount is the 
same as the House level, the budget estimate, and the 1995 
amount.

             Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety

Appropriations, 1995....................................................
Budget estimate, 1996...................................    \1\ $580,000
House allowance.........................................         450,000
Committee recommendation................................         440,000

\1\ The 1996 budget proposed that this office be funded in a single 
account under the Office of the Secretary.

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety provides 
direction and coordination in carrying out the laws enacted by 
the Congress with respect to the Department's inspection of 
meat, poultry, and egg products. The Office has oversight and 
management responsibilities for the Food Safety and Inspection 
Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety, the 
Committee recommends an appropriation of $440,000. This amount 
is $440,000 more than the level provided for 1995, $140,000 
less than the budget request, and $10,000 less than the House 
recommendation.

                   Food Safety and Inspection Service

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 1995 \1\................................\2\ $525,820,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     594,889,000
House allowance.........................................     540,365,000
Committee recommendation................................     568,685,000

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, funds appropriated for egg products inspection under the 
Agricultural Marketing Service and the preharvest pathogen reduction and 
the salmonella enteritidis programs under the ``Salaries and expenses'' 
account of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service are included. 
Funds appropriated for civil rights enforcement are excluded. On a 
comparable basis, USDA estimates fiscal year 1995 appropriations of 
$542,270,000.
\2\ Reflects enacted supplemental of $9,082,000.

    The major objectives of the Service are to assure that meat 
and poultry products are wholesome, unadulterated, and properly 
labeled and packaged, as required by the Federal Meat 
Inspection Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act; provide 
continuous in-plant inspection to egg processing plants under 
the Egg Products Inspection Act; and administer the pathogen 
reduction and salmonella enteritidis programs.
    The Food Safety and Inspection Service was established on 
June 17, 1981, by Secretary's Memorandum No. 1000-1, issued 
pursuant to Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953.
    Legislation was enacted in 1986 to amend the continuous 
inspection requirements of the Federal Meat Inspection Act. The 
new Processed Products Inspection Improvement Act of 1986 gives 
the Secretary discretion to schedule inspections at processing 
plants based upon such criteria as the nature of the product 
produced and the plants' compliance histories.
    The inspection program of the Food Safety and Inspection 
Service provides continuous in-plant inspection of all domestic 
plants preparing meat, poultry or egg products for sale or 
distribution; reviews foreign inspection systems and 
establishments that prepare meat or poultry products for export 
to the United States; and provides technical and financial 
assistance to States which maintain meat and poultry inspection 
programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Food Safety and Inspection Service, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $568,685,000. This amount is 
$42,865,000 more than the amount provided in 1995, $26,204,000 
less than the budget request, and $28,320,000 more than the 
House level.
    The Committee recognizes the need for the implementation of 
a meat and poultry inspection system based on hazard analysis 
and critical control points [HACCP]. The Committee encourages 
the Department to implement the new inspection system in a 
manner which replaces, rather than adds to, the current 
organoleptic inspection system. The Committee expects the 
Department to work with producers, industry, processors, and 
consumers to develop a successful, modern food safety system. 
The Committee is aware of the public meetings the Secretary has 
scheduled for discussion of this issue and expects the 
Secretary to provide a report to the Committee prior to 
promulgation of the final rule.

    Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural 
                                Services

Appropriations, 1995....................................        $549,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     \1\ 570,000
House allowance.........................................         549,000
Committee recommendation................................         549,000

\1\ The 1996 budget proposed that this office be funded in a single 
account under the Office of the Secretary.

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign 
Agricultural Services provides direction and coordination in 
carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to 
the Department's international affairs (except for foreign 
economics development) and commodity programs. The Office has 
oversight and management responsibilities for the Consolidated 
Farm Service Agency, including the Commodity Credit Corporation 
and crop insurance, and the Foreign Agricultural Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign 
Agricultural Services, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $549,000. This amount is the same as the House 
level, $21,000 less than the budget request, and the same as 
the 1995 amount.

                    Consolidated Farm Service Agency

    The Consolidated Farm Service Agency [CFSA] was established 
by the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994, 
Public Law 103-354, enacted October 13, 1994. The CFSA 
administers the commodity price support and production 
adjustment programs financed by the Commodity Credit 
Corporation, the warehouse examination function, the 
Conservation Reserve Program [CRP], and several other 
conservation cost-share programs from the former Agricultural 
Stabilization and Conservation Service; crop insurance and 
other risk management programs from the Federal Crop Insurance 
Corporation; and farm ownership and operating, and emergency 
disaster loan programs from the former Farmers Home 
Administration.
    Production adjustment programs.--The Agricultural Act of 
1949, as amended, mandates production adjustment programs for 
wheat, cotton, and rice when carryover stocks are at specified 
levels. The Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 
1990 [FACT Act], approved on November 28, 1990, sets farm 
policy through the 1996 crops. The Agricultural Adjustment Act 
of 1938, as amended, authorizes program parameters for tobacco 
and peanuts.
    Designed to give farmers and ranchers the opportunity to 
earn incomes that are comparable with returns elsewhere in the 
economy, the program objectives include: (1) the maintenance of 
national aggregate net farm income at levels sufficient to 
insure investment in agriculture necessary to utilize 
production capacity within environmental constraints; (2) the 
development of agriculture policy and programs so that family 
farms will be strengthened and will provide adequate levels of 
net income per farm; (3) the support of efforts to strengthen 
farmers' power to bargain in the sale of farm products and the 
purchase of farm inputs; and (4) the continuation of the 
requirement for the maintenance of farmer-held and controlled 
grain reserves to aid in orderly marketing, and for 
humanitarian use.
    The 1990 act continues the $50,000 limitation on deficiency 
and diversion payments and sets a limitation of $75,000 on 
marketing loan gains, emergency compensation (Findley) 
payments, and loan deficiency payments. The 1990 act continues 
the overall limitation of $250,000 and includes all of the 
above payments as well as resource adjustment and inventory 
reduction payments. These limitations do not apply to support 
loans or purchases available to eligible program participants.
    Commodity Credit Corporation program activities.--Various 
price support and related programs have been authorized in 
numerous legislative enactments since the early 1930's. 
Operations under these programs are financed through the 
Commodity Credit Corporation. Personnel and facilities of the 
Consolidated Farm Service Agency are utilized in the 
administration of the Commodity Credit Corporation, and the 
Administrator of the Agency is also Executive Vice President of 
the Corporation.
    Foreign assistance programs and other special activities.--
Various surplus disposal programs and other special activities 
are conducted pursuant to specific statutory authorizations and 
directives. These laws authorize the use of CCC funds and 
facilities to implement the programs. Appropriations for these 
programs are transferred or paid to the Corporation for its 
costs incurred in connection with these activities, such as 
Public Law 480 and the National Wool Act.
    Farm credit programs.--The Department's reorganization has 
placed the farm credit programs under CFSA and is designed to 
facilitate improved coordination between the credit programs 
and CFSA's risk management, conservation, and commodity support 
programs. CFSA reviews applications, makes and collects loans, 
and provides technical assistance and guidance to borrowers. 
Under credit reform, administrative costs associated with 
agricultural credit insurance fund [ACIF] loans are 
appropriated to the ACIF program account and transferred to 
CFSA salaries and expenses.
    Risk management.--Includes the program activities in direct 
support of the Federal crop insurance program as authorized by 
the Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of Agriculture 
Reorganization Act of 1994. The act repeals ad hoc disaster 
authority and replaces disaster bills as the Federal response 
to emergencies involving widespread crop loss. Functions 
included are research and development, insurance service, 
compliance and emergency, and noninsured assistance. Included 
is policy formulation, procedures, and regulations development. 
Reviews and evaluations are conducted for overall performance 
to ensure the actuarial soundness of the insurance program.

                         salaries and expenses

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Transfers from                 
                       Appropriations       program        Total, CFSA, 
                                            accounts           S&E;      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995                                                    
 \1\................  \2\ $790,217,000   ($201,852,000)   ($992,069,000)
Budget estimate,                                                        
 1996...............       811,771,000    (215,516,000)  (1,027,287,000)
House allowance.....       788,388,000    (209,780,000)    (998,168,000)
Committee                                                               
 recommendation.....       805,888,000    (215,516,000)  (1,021,404,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of     
  1994, funds appropriated for Agricultural Stabilization and           
  Conservation Service salaries and expenses and Federal Crop Insurance 
  Corporation administrative and operating expenses and program account 
  transfers to the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service  
  and Farmers Home Administration salaries and expenses accounts are    
  included. Funds appropriated for administering certain conservation   
  programs are excluded. These funds are included under the             
  ``Conservation operations'' account of the Natural Resources          
  Conservation Service. Funds appropriated for the national appeals     
  function are excluded. These funds are included under the National    
  Appeals Division of Executive Operations. Funds appropriated for the  
  EEO counseling function are excluded. These funds are included under  
  the Office of Civil Rights Enforcement under the departmental         
  administration appropriation. On a comparable basis, USDA estimates   
  fiscal year 1995 appropriations of $783,616,000.                      
\2\ Reflects enacted supplemental of $5,000,000.                        


    The account ``Salaries and expenses, Consolidated Farm 
Service Agency,'' funds the administrative expenses of program 
administration and other functions assigned to CFSA. The funds 
consist of appropriations and transfers from the CCC loans, 
Public Law 480 loans, and agricultural credit insurance fund 
program accounts, and miscellaneous advances from other 
sources. All administrative funds used by CFSA are consolidated 
into one account. The consolidation provides clarity and better 
management and control of funds, and facilitates accounting, 
fiscal, and budgetary work by eliminating the necessity for 
making individual allocations and allotments and maintaining 
and recording obligations and expenditures under numerous 
separate accounts.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For salaries and expenses of the Consolidated Farm Service 
Agency, the Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$805,888,000. This amount is $805,888,000 more than the 1995 
level, $5,883,000 less than the budget request, and $17,500,000 
more than the House recommended level.
    The Committee does not concur with House report language 
directing the CFSA to initiate a five-State pilot program in 
crop year 1996 for the delivery of catastrophic crop insurance 
policies exclusively by private companies and agents. Due to 
the uneven distribution of private agents in States and across 
the country, the capacity may not exist for the delivery of 
catastrophic coverage in areas where producers have not shown 
interest in purchasing additional levels of coverage. However, 
in this period of declining budgets, the Committee believes 
that the Department should carefully consider its utilization 
of resources to deliver catastrophic coverage where private 
industry capacity does exist.

                         state mediation grants

Appropriations, 1995....................................      $3,000,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................       3,000,000
House allowance.........................................       2,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               3,000,000

    This program is authorized under title V of the 
Agricultural Credit Act of 1987. Grants are made to States 
which have been certified by CFSA as having an agricultural 
loan mediation program. Grants will be solely for operation and 
administration of the State's agricultural loan mediation 
program.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For State mediation grants, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $3,000,000. This amount is $1,000,000 more 
than the House level, and the same as the budget request and 
the 1995 levels.

                        dairy indemnity program

Appropriations, 1995....................................................
Budget estimate, 1996...................................        $100,000
House allowance.........................................         100,000

Committee recommendation

                                                                 100,000

    Under the program, the Department makes indemnification 
payments to dairy farmers and manufacturers of dairy products 
who, through no fault of their own, suffer losses because they 
are directed to remove their milk from commercial markets due 
to contamination of their products by registered pesticides. 
The program also authorizes indemnity payments to dairy farmers 
for losses resulting from the removal of cows or dairy products 
from the market due to nuclear radiation or fallout.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the dairy indemnity program, the Committee recommends 
an appropriation of $100,000. The amount is the same as the 
House level and the budget request, and $100,000 more than the 
1995 amount.

        outreach for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers

Appropriations, 1995....................................      $2,995,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................       3,000,000
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                                               2,000,000

    This program is authorized under section 2501 of title XXV 
of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990. 
Grants are made to eligible community-based organizations with 
demonstrated experience in providing education on other 
agriculturally-related services to socially disadvantaged 
farmers and ranchers in their area of influence. Also eligible 
are the 1890 land-grant colleges, Tuskegee University, Indian 
tribal community colleges, and Hispanic-serving postsecondary 
education facilities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For grants for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, 
the Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,000,000. This 
amount is $2,000,000 more than the House level, $1,000,000 less 
than the budget request, and $995,000 less than the 1995 
amount.

           Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account

    The Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account is 
used to insure or guarantee farm ownership, soil and water, 
farm operating, and emergency loans to individuals, as well as 
the following types of loans to associations: irrigation and 
drainage, grazing, and Indian tribe land acquisition. The 
insurance endorsement on each insured loan may include an 
agreement by the Government to purchase the loan after a 
specified initial period.
    CFSA is also authorized to provide financial assistance to 
borrowers by guaranteeing loans made by private lenders having 
a contract of guarantee from CFSA as approved by the Secretary 
of Agriculture.
    The following programs are financed through this fund:
    Farm ownership loans.--Made to borrowers who cannot obtain 
credit elsewhere to restructure their debts, improve or 
purchase farms, refinance nonfarm enterprises which supplement 
but do not supplant farm income, or make additions to farms. An 
insured loan may not exceed $200,000 and a guaranteed loan may 
not exceed $300,000. Loans are made for 40 years or less.
    Farm operating loans.--Provide short-to-intermediate term 
production or chattel credit to farmers who cannot obtain 
credit elsewhere, to improve their farm and home operations, 
and to develop or maintain a reasonable standard of living. An 
insured loan may not exceed $200,000 and a guaranteed loan is 
limited to $400,000. The term of the loan varies from 1 to 7 
years.
    Emergency disaster loans.--Made available in designated 
areas (counties) and in contiguous counties where property 
damage and/or severe production losses have occurred as a 
direct result of a natural disaster. Areas may be declared by 
the President or designated for emergency loan assistance by 
the Secretary of Agriculture. The loan may be up to $500,000.
    Soil and water conservation loans.--Made to individuals, 
cooperatives, corporations, or partnerships who own and/or 
operate a farm, for land and water development, use and 
conservation. The loan limit is $200,000 for an insured loan 
and $300,000 for a guaranteed loan. The repayment period may be 
up to 40 years.
    Credit sales of acquired property.--Property is sold out of 
inventory and is made to an eligible buyer by providing CFSA 
loans.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends a total level for farm loans of 
$3,182,446,000. This is $2,309,000 less than the 1995 level, 
$21,421,000 less than the budget request, and $174,196,000 more 
than the House recommended level.
    The Committee is aware of the severe damage that has 
occurred to the 1995 crop of cotton in Mississippi, Texas, 
Arkansas, Tennessee, Alabama, and Georgia due to tobacco 
budworms and beet armyworms. It is estimated that over 1.6 
million acres have been affected at a value of over 
$700,000,000. The Committee expects the Secretary to complete 
requested damage assessment reports in a timely manner and 
utilize the Emergency Disaster Loan Program to the maximum 
extent allowed by law to provide assistance to producers 
affected by this disaster. Loan applications should be approved 
expeditiously by the Department. If available program funds are 
insufficient to meet the demand for disaster loan assistance, 
the Committee expects the Department to submit a request for 
additional funds.
    The Committee is aware that the Secretary has authority to 
promulgate regulations for the establishment of loans under 7 
U.S.C. 1989. The Committee urges the Secretary to utilize this 
authority to promulgate regulations for the establishment of a 
loan program for the boll weevil eradication program. Due to 
severe fiscal constraints, the Committee is unable to provide 
an increase in direct appropriations for the boll weevil 
program for fiscal year 1996. The establishment of a loan 
program would accelerate expansion of the eradication program 
without substantial additional cost to the Federal Government. 
The Secretary should report to the Committee on the progress of 
promulgating these regulations by January 31, 1996.
    The following table reflects the program levels for farm 
credit programs administered by the Consolidated Farm Service 
Agency recommended by the Committee, as compared to 1995 and 
the budget request and House recommended levels for fiscal year 
1996:

                                    AGRICULTURAL CREDIT PROGRAMS--LOAN LEVELS                                   
                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    1996 House       Committee  
                                                       1995         1996 budget      allowance    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farm ownership:                                                                                                 
    Direct......................................          78,081          70,000          35,000          60,000
    Guaranteed..................................         540,674         540,687         550,000         550,000
Farm operating:                                                                                                 
    Direct......................................         500,000         542,860         400,000         550,000
    Unsubsidized guaranteed.....................       1,735,000       1,700,000       1,700,000       1,700,000
    Subsidized guaranteed.......................         230,000         200,000         200,000         200,000
Soil and water:                                                                                                 
    Direct......................................  ..............           2,898  ..............  ..............
    Guaranteed..................................  ..............           1,422  ..............  ..............
Indian tribe land acquisition...................           1,000           1,000             750             750
Emergency disaster..............................         100,000         100,000         100,000         100,000
Credit sales of acquired property...............  ..............          45,000          22,500          21,696
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, farm loans.........................       3,184,755       3,203,867       3,008,250       3,182,446
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       estimated loan subsidy and administrative expenses levels

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Insured loan     Guaranteed                    Administrative
                                                      subsidy      loan subsidy    Total subsidy     expenses   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995............................     $93,169,000     $59,655,000    $152,824,000    $243,766,000
Budget estimate, 1996...........................     131,474,000      56,031,000     187,505,000     227,258,000
House allowance.................................      99,266,000      56,339,000     155,605,000     221,541,000
Committee recommendation........................     125,471,000      56,339,000     181,810,000     227,258,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated and loan guarantees committed in 1996, as well 
as for administrative expenses.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

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

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       House         Committee  
                                                   1995 enacted     1996 budget      allowance    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan subsidies:                                                                                                 
    Farm ownership:                                                                                             
        Direct..................................          10,983          16,373           8,187          14,034
        Guaranteed..............................          20,870          19,681          20,019          20,019
    Farm operating:                                                                                             
        Direct..................................          56,555          74,209          54,680          75,185
        Unsubsidized guarantees.................           9,360          18,360          18,360          18,360
        Subsidized guarantees...................          29,425          17,960          17,960          17,960
    Soil and water:                                                                                             
        Direct..................................  ..............             608  ..............  ..............
        Guaranteed..............................  ..............              30  ..............  ..............
    Indian tribe land acquisition...............             123             274             206             206
    Emergency disaster..........................          26,290          32,080          32,080          32,080
    Credit sales of acquired properties.........  ..............           8,226           4,113           3,966
    Negative subsidies..........................            -782            -296  ..............  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, loan subsidies.....................         152,824         187,505         155,605         181,810
ACIF expenses...................................         243,766         227,258         221,541         227,258
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              CORPORATIONS

                   Federal Crop Insurance Corporation

    The Federal Crop Insurance Reform Act of 1994 was designed 
to replace the combination of crop insurance and ad hoc 
disaster payment programs with a strengthened crop insurance 
program.
    Under the new program, producers of insurable crops are 
eligible to receive a basic level of protection against 
catastrophic losses, which covers 50 percent of the normal 
yield at 60 percent of the expected price. The only cost to the 
producer is a processing fee of $50 per policy, or $200 for all 
crops grown by the producer in a county, with a cap of $600 
regardless of the number of crops and counties involved. 
Catastrophic [CAT] coverage is required for producers who 
participate in the commodity support, farm credit, and certain 
other farm programs. This coverage is available either through 
CFSA county offices or private insurance companies.
    The new program also provides additional buy-up coverage 
which producers may obtain from private insurance companies. 
Producers who purchase this coverage receive an additional 
subsidy on their CAT coverage on which the price guarantee is 
increased to 65 percent of the expected price, rather than 60 
percent for stand alone CAT coverage. Further, the delivery 
costs for buy-up coverage are fully subsidized.
    The reform legislation also includes a Noninsured 
Assistance Program [NAP] for producers of crops for which there 
is currently no insurance available. NAP was established to 
ensure that most producers of crops not yet insurable will have 
protection against crop catastrophes comparable to protection 
previously provided by ad hoc disaster assistance programs.

                federal crop insurance corporation fund

Appropriations, 1995....................................    $219,107,000
Budget estimate, 1996..................................\1\ 1,263,708,000
House allowance.........................................   1,263,708,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,263,708,000

\1\ The budget requests such sums as may be necessary to remain 
available until expended.

    The Federal Crop Insurance Act, as amended by the Federal 
Crop Insurance Reform Act of 1994, authorizes the payment of 
expenses which may include indemnity payments, loss adjustment, 
noninsured crop assistance payments, delivery expenses, 
program-related research and development, startup costs for 
implementing this legislation such as studies, pilot projects, 
data processing improvements, public outreach, and related 
tasks and functions.
    All program costs for 1996, except for Federal salaries and 
expenses, are mandatory expenditures subject to appropriation.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation fund, the 
Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as may be 
necessary, the same as the budget request and the House 
recommendation. This amount is estimated to be $1,263,708,000. 
The 1995 appropriation was $219,107,000.

                   Commodity Credit Corporation Fund

    The Commodity Credit Corporation [CCC] is a wholly owned 
Government corporation created in 1933 to stabilize, support, 
and protect farm income and prices; to help maintain balanced 
and adequate supplies of agricultural commodities, including 
products, foods, feeds, and fibers; and to help in the orderly 
distribution of these commodities. CCC was originally 
incorporated under a Delaware charter and was reincorporated 
June 30, 1948, as a Federal corporation within the Department 
of Agriculture by the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act, 
approved June 29, 1948 (15 U.S.C. 714).
    The principal operations conducted by CCC are support 
programs for agricultural commodities, including the storage, 
handling, and disposition of commodities acquired under the 
programs; acreage limitation, loan deficiency, deficiency, 
disaster, and/or diversion payment programs for feed grains, 
wheat, rice, and cotton; certificate programs; a conservation 
reserve program; and special activities, such as those under 
the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954 
(Public Law 480), which are financed by appropriations 
authorized by statutes providing for these activities. Under 
the Agricultural Trade Act of 1978, as amended, CCC may finance 
short-term export sales on credit terms not to exceed 3 years, 
and intermediate-term export credit sales in excess of 3 years, 
but not more than 10 years. The Corporation is also authorized 
under its charter and the Agricultural Trade Act of 1978, as 
amended, to enter into export guarantee financing arrangements 
with respect to exported commodities. In 1992, there are new 
credit reform procedures for Federal credit programs authorized 
by the Balanced Budget Act of 1990, title XIII of the Omnibus 
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990. These procedures require 
that budget authority and outlays for these programs represent 
subsidy costs (including interest subsidies) and administrative 
expenses, rather than claim disbursements and repayments.
    Management of the Corporation is vested in a board of 
directors, subject to the general supervision and direction of 
the Secretary of Agriculture, who is an ex-officio director and 
chairman of the board. The board consists of seven members, in 
addition to the Secretary, who are appointed by the President 
of the United States with the advice and consent of the Senate. 
Officers of the Corporation are designated according to their 
positions in the Department of Agriculture.
    The activities of the Corporation are carried out mainly by 
the personnel and through the facilities of the Consolidated 
Farm Service Agency [CFSA] and the Consolidated Farm Service 
Agency [CFSA] State and county committees. The Foreign 
Agriculture Service, the General Sales Manager, other agencies 
and offices of the Department, and commercial agents are also 
used to carry out certain phases of the Corporation's 
activities.
    The Corporation's capital stock of $100,000,000 is held by 
the United States. Under present law up to $30,000,000,000 may 
be borrowed from the U.S. Treasury, from private lending 
agencies, and from others, at any one time. The Corporation 
reserves a sufficient amount of its borrowing authority to 
purchase at any time all notes and other obligations evidencing 
loans made by such agencies and others. All bonds, notes, 
debentures, and similar obligations issued by the Corporation 
are subject to approval by the Secretary of the Treasury.
    Under Public Law 87-155 (15 U.S.C. 713a-11, 713a-12), 
annual appropriations are authorized for each fiscal year, 
commencing with fiscal year 1961. These appropriations are to 
reimburse the Corporation for net realized losses.

                 reimbursement for net realized losses

Appropriations, 1995.................................... $15,500,000,000
Budget estimate, 1996.................................\1\ 10,400,000,000
House allowance.........................................  10,400,000,000
Committee recommendation................................  10,400,000,000

\1\ Amount proposed to be reimbursed through a current indefinite 
appropriation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the payment to reimburse the Commodity Credit 
Corporation for net realized losses, the Committee recommends 
an appropriation of such sums as may be necessary, but not to 
exceed $10,400,000,000. This is $5,100,000,000 below the amount 
provided for 1995 and the same as the House recommendation. The 
budget requested a current indefinite appropriation and 
estimated the amount to be $10,400,000,000.

       operations and maintenance for hazardous waste management

                (limitation on administrative expenses)

Limitation, 1995........................................    ($5,000,000)
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     (5,000,000)
House allowance.........................................     (5,000,000)

Committee recommendation

                                                             (5,000,000)

    CCC's hazardous waste management program is intended to 
ensure compliance with the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended, and the 
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended. Beginning 
in fiscal year 1992, investigative and cleanup costs associated 
with the management of CCC hazardous waste are paid from USDA's 
hazardous waste management appropriation. CCC funds operations 
and maintenance costs only.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For Commodity Credit Corporation operations and maintenance 
for hazardous waste management, the Committee provides a 
limitation of $5,000,000. This amount is the same as the 1995 
level, the budget request, and House recommendation.
                    TITLE II--CONSERVATION PROGRAMS

  Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment

Appropriations, 1995....................................        $677,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     \1\ 696,000
House allowance.........................................         677,000
Committee recommendation................................         677,000

\1\ The 1996 budget proposed that this office be funded in a single 
account under the Office of the Secretary.

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and 
Environment provides direction and coordination in carrying out 
the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to natural 
resources and the environment. The Office has oversight and 
management responsibilities for the Natural Resources 
Conservation Service and the Forest Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources 
and Environment, the Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$677,000. This amount is the same as the amount provided for 
1995 and the House level, and $19,000 less than the budget 
request.

                 Natural Resources Conservation Service

    The Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] was 
established pursuant to Public Law 103-354, the Department of 
Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6962). NRCS 
combines the authorities of the former Soil Conservation 
Service as well as five natural resource conservation cost-
share programs previously administered by the Agricultural 
Stabilization and Conservation Service. Through the years, this 
Service, together with the agricultural conservation programs 
and over 2 million conservation district cooperatives, has been 
a major factor in holding down pollution. The Natural Resources 
Conservation Service works with conservation districts, 
watershed groups, and the Federal and State agencies having 
related responsibilities in bringing about physical adjustments 
in land use that will conserve soil and water resources, 
provide for agricultural production on a sustained basis, and 
reduce damage by flood and sedimentation. The Service, with its 
dams, debris basins, and planned watersheds, provides technical 
advice to the agricultural conservation programs, where the 
Federal Government pays about one-third of the cost, and, 
through these programs, has done perhaps more to hold down 
pollution than any other activity. These programs and water 
sewage systems in rural areas tend to hold pollution back from 
the areas of greatest damage, the rivers and harbors near our 
cities.
    The conservation activities of the Natural Resources 
Conservation Service are guided by the priorities and 
objectives as set forth in the National Conservation Program 
[NCP] which was prepared in response to the provisions of the 
Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act of 1977 [RCA] (Public 
Law 95-192). The long-term objectives of the program are 
designed to maintain and improve the soil, water, and related 
resources of the Nation's nonpublic lands by: reducing 
excessive soil erosion; improving irrigation efficiencies; 
improving water management; reducing upstream flood damages; 
improving range condition; and improving water quality.

                        conservation operations

Appropriations, 1995 \1\................................    $556,062,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     645,735,000
House allowance.........................................     629,986,000
Committee recommendation................................     637,860,000

\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
1994, funds appropriated for the appeals staff and civil rights 
enforcement are excluded. Funds transferred from CFSA for program 
administration are included. On a comparable basis, USDA estimates 
fiscal year 1995 appropriations of $559,538,000.

    Conservation operations is authorized by Public Law 74-46 
(16 U.S.C. 590a-590f). Activities include:
    Conservation technical assistance.--Provides assistance to 
district cooperators and other land users in the planning and 
application of conservation treatments to control erosion and 
improve the quantity and quality of soil resources, improve and 
conserve water, enhance fish and wildlife habitat, conserve 
energy, improve woodland, pasture and range conditions, and 
reduce upstream flooding; all to protect and enhance the 
natural resource base.
    Inventory and monitoring provides soil, water, and related 
resource data for land conservation, use, and development; 
guidance of community development; identification of prime 
agricultural producing areas that should be protected; use in 
protecting the quality of the environment; and issuance of 
periodic inventory reports of resource conditions.
    Resource appraisal and program development ensures that 
programs administered by the Secretary of Agriculture for the 
conservation of soil, water, and related resources shall 
respond to the Nation's long-term needs.
    Soil surveys.--Inventories the Nation's basic soil 
resources and determines land capabilities and conservation 
treatment needs. Soil survey publications include 
interpretations useful to cooperators, other Federal agencies, 
State, and local organizations.
    Snow survey and water forecasting.--Provides estimates of 
annual water availability from high mountain snow packs and 
relates this summer stream flow in the Western States and 
Alaska. Information is used by agriculture, industry, and 
cities in estimating future water supplies.
    Plant materials centers.--Assembles, tests, and encourages 
increased use of plant species which show promise for use in 
the treatment of conservation problem areas.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For conservation operations, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $637,860,000. This amount is $81,798,000 more 
than the 1995 level, $7,875,000 less than the budget estimate, 
and $7,874,000 more than the House level.
    The Committee concurs in the House recommendation that 
$5,000,000 be directed for a grazing lands conservation 
initiative. The Committee has not included funding for the 
Center of Excellence.
    The Committee recommends $4,750,000 for continuing work on 
the Chesapeake Bay program, the same level as for 1995.
    The Committee also has included $250,000, the same as the 
1995 level, for continued support of agricultural development 
and resource conservation in the native Hawaiian communities 
serviced by the Molokai Agriculture Community Committee.
    Included in the Committee recommendation is $800,000, the 
same as the 1995 level, for planning of the Bayou Meto and 
Beouf/Tensas areas through the use of least-cost methods as 
developed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service in 
Arkansas. In addition, the Committee expects the continuation 
of planning and design activities for the Kuhn Bayou, AR, 
project.
    The Committee has included $250,000 for design and 
technical assistance in Franklin County, MS.
    The Committee has included $400,000, the same amount as for 
1995, to continue a pilot program for the development of 
techniques to address the loess hills erosion problem in Iowa.
    The Committee provides the 1995 level of funding to conduct 
the Mississippi Delta water resources study. This study is 
critical to the entire lower Mississippi Valley region, and has 
potential national significance in the areas of water quality 
and quantity.
    The Committee is aware of important research underway at 
the Golden Meadow, LA, Plant Materials Center, in developing 
new species for revegetating fragile coastal areas. The 
Committee expects the Service to continue important 
biotechnology projects with the Crowley, LA, Rice Research 
Station on tissue culture and other areas and has provided 
$75,000, the same amount as for 1995, for this purpose. In 
addition, the Committee has provided $150,000 to continue a 
program for research on nutria-resistant materials and 
materials to restore wetlands and prevent erosion of barrier 
islands and inland wetlands.
    The Committee provides $250,000, the same amount as for 
1995, to continue work on the Great Lakes Basin Program for 
soil and erosion sediment control.
    The Committee expects work to continue on the Little 
Auglaize watershed in Ohio and the Piney Creek Watershed in 
Mississippi.
    The Committee provides $3,000,000, the same amount as for 
1995, to continue a multiyear rural recycling and water 
resource protection initiative in the Mississippi Delta region 
of Louisiana, Arkansas, and Mississippi.
    The Committee supports the GIS Center for Advanced Spacial 
Technology in Arkansas, its development of digital soil maps, 
and the continuation of the National Digital Orthophotography 
Program. NRCS has been the lead agency within USDA for the 
development of GIS capabilities and NRCS is encouraged to 
maintain its strong relationship with the Center.
    The Committee also directs the Service to provide a 
feasibility study on the establishment of a plant materials 
center at the University of Northern Iowa.

                 river basin surveys and investigations

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $12,970,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      11,210,000
House allowance.........................................         ( \1\ )
Committee recommendation................................       8,369,000

\1\ Funded under proposed ``Watershed surveys and planning'' account.

    Section 6 of the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention 
Act (Public Law 566, 83d, Cong.), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1006-
1009), provides for cooperation with other Federal, State, and 
local agencies in making investigations and surveys of the 
watersheds of rivers and other waterways as a basis for the 
development of coordinated programs. Reports of the 
investigations and surveys are prepared to serve as a guide for 
the development of agricultural, rural, and upstream watershed 
aspects of water and related land resources, and as a basis for 
coordination of this development with downstream and other 
phases of water development.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For river basin surveys and investigations, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $8,369,000. This amount is 
$2,841,000 less than the budget request, $8,369,000 more than 
the House level, and $4,601,000 less than the 1995 amount.

                           watershed planning

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $10,546,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................       7,542,000
House allowance.........................................         ( \1\ )
Committee recommendation................................       5,630,000

\1\ Funded under proposed ``Watershed surveys and planning'' account.

    The Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (Public 
Law 566, 83d Cong.), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1001-1008), provides 
for cooperation between the Federal Government and the States 
and their political subdivisions in a program of watershed 
planning. Watershed plans form the basis for installing works 
of improvement for floodwater retardation, erosion control, and 
reduction of sedimentation in the watershed of rivers and 
streams and to further the conservation, development, 
utilization, and disposal of water.
    The work of the Department in watershed planning consists 
of assisting local organizations to develop their watershed 
work plan by making investigations and surveys in response to 
requests made by sponsoring local organizations. These plans 
describe the soil erosion, water management, and sedimentation 
problems in a watershed and works of improvement proposed to 
alleviate these problems. Plans also include estimated benefits 
and costs, cost sharing and operating and maintenance 
arrangements, and other appropriate information necessary to 
justify Federal assistance for carrying out the plan.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For watershed planning, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $5,630,000. This amount is $4,916,000 less 
than the 1995 level, $1,912,000 less than the budget estimate, 
and $5,630,000 more than the House recommended level.
    The Committee has included $300,000, the same as the 1995 
amount, for the Zuni River watershed.

               watershed and flood prevention operations

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $70,000,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     100,000,000
House allowance.........................................     100,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                             100,000,000

    The Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (Public 
Law 566, 83d Cong.), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1001-1005, 1007-
1009), provides for cooperation between the Federal Government 
and the States and their political subdivisions in a program to 
prevent erosion, floodwater, and sediment damages in the 
watersheds or rivers and streams and to further the 
conservation, development, utilization, and disposal of water.
    The Natural Resources Conservation Service has general 
responsibility for administration of activities which include 
cooperation with local sponsors, State, and other public 
agencies in the installation of planned works of improvement to 
reduce erosion, floodwater, and sediment damage; conserve, 
develop, utilize, and dispose of water; plan and install works 
of improvement for flood prevention including the development 
of recreational facilities and the improvement of fish and 
wildlife habitat; and loans to local organizations to help 
finance the local share of the cost of carrying out planned 
watershed and flood prevention works of improvement.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For watershed and flood prevention operations, the 
Committee recommends an appropriation of $100,000,000. This 
amount is $30,000,000 more than the 1995 appropriation, and the 
same as the budget request and the House level.
    The Committee encourages the Department to continue to 
provide technical assistance and adequate funding to repair 
erosion damage in the counties of Adams, Alcorn, Claiborne, 
Covington, DeSoto, Forrest, Grenada, Hinds, Holmes, Itawamba, 
Jones, Lauderdale, Leake, Lee, Lowndes, Madison, Monroe, 
Neshoba, Panola, Perry, Pontotoc, Prentiss, Rankin, Tippah, 
Union, Warren, and Yazoo, MS.
    The Committee expects progress to continue on the Yazoo 
basin demonstration erosion control project and the Little 
Sioux and Mosquito Creek watersheds in Iowa.
    The Committee is aware of limited water storage and 
inefficient delivery systems on the islands of Hawaii and Maui 
which are unable to mitigate persistent drought conditions and 
conserve water to support diversified agriculture. The 
Committee believes that the Service should give consideration 
to improving these systems.
    The Committee is aware of the flooding situation in the 
Devil's Lake basin in North Dakota and encourages the Natural 
Resources Conservation Service [NRCS], with the cooperation of 
the Consolidated Farm Services Agency [CFSA], to assist in the 
locally coordinated flood response and water management 
activities being developed with the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency. NRCS and CFSA should utilize conservation 
programs in providing water holding and storage areas on 
private land as necessary intermediate measures in watershed 
management.

                     watershed surveys and planning

Appropriations, 1995....................................................
Budget estimate, 1996...................................................
House allowance.........................................     $14,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

    The House proposes the consolidation of funding for river 
basin surveys and investigations and watershed planning into a 
single appropriations account.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee does not concur in the House recommendation 
to consolidate funding for river basin surveys and 
investigations and watershed planning under a single account. 
The Committee recommends continued funding of these programs 
under separate appropriations accounts.

                 resource conservation and development

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $32,845,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      28,900,000
House allowance.........................................         ( \1\ )
Committee recommendation................................      27,000,000

\1\ Funded under proposed ``Conservation programs'' account.

    The Natural Resources Conservation Service has general 
responsibility under provisions of section 102, title I of the 
Food and Agriculture Act of 1962, for developing overall work 
plans for resource conservation and development projects in 
cooperation with local sponsors; to help develop local programs 
of land conservation and utilization; to assist local groups 
and individuals in carrying out such plans and programs; to 
conduct surveys and investigations relating to the conditions 
and factors affecting such work on private lands; and to make 
loans to project sponsors for conservation and development 
purposes and to individual operators for establishing soil and 
water conservation practices.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For resource conservation and development, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $27,000,000. This amount is 
$5,845,000 less than the 1995 level, $1,900,000 less than the 
budget estimate, and $27,000,000 more than the House 
recommended level.

                   great plains conservation program

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $15,172,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      11,000,000
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

    The Great Plains Conservation Program was authorized under 
Public Law 84-1021, 84th Congress (16 U.S.C. 590p), as amended. 
Public Law 91-118 extended the Great Plains cost-share 
contracting authority to December 31, 1981. Public Law 96-263 
extended the program until September 30, 1991. Public Law 101-
624 extends the program until September 30, 2001. This program 
provides technical assistance and long-term cost sharing to 
land users in the counties of the Great Plains States plagued 
with recurring wind erosion problems. It is designed to provide 
needed protection and improvement of soil, water, plant, and 
wildlife resources of this vast agricultural area. Installation 
of complete conservation programs on entire operating units in 
the area helps to stabilize the local economy while assisting 
the individual producer. The work supplements other soil and 
water conservation programs and activities in counties 
designated by the Secretary. It is also coordinated with 
programs and objectives of locally managed conservation 
districts, State agencies, and community groups. This program 
contributes to total environmental improvement through 
reduction of wind and water erosion and sedimentation and 
abatement of agriculture-related pollutants.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    Due to severe fiscal constraints, the Committee defers 
funding for the Great Plains Conservation Program. This is 
$15,172,000 less than the 1995 level, the same as the House 
recommendation, and $11,000,000 less than the budget request.

                      forestry incentives program

Appropriations, 1995....................................      $6,625,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................       6,625,000
House allowance.........................................         ( \1\ )
Committee recommendation................................       6,325,000

\1\ Funded under proposed ``Conservation programs'' account.

    The Forestry Incentives Program is authorized by the 
Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-
313), as amended by section 1214, title XII, of the Food, 
Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990. Its purpose 
is to encourage the development, management, and protection of 
nonindustrial private forest lands. This program will be 
carried out by providing technical assistance and long-term 
cost-sharing agreements with private landowners.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Forestry Incentives Program, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $6,325,000. This amount is 
$300,000 less than the 1995 appropriation and the budget 
request, and $6,325,000 more than the House level.

             colorado river basin salinity control program

Appropriations, 1995....................................      $4,500,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................       2,681,000
House allowance.........................................         ( \1\ )
Committee recommendation................................       1,000,000

\1\ Funded under proposed ``Conservation programs'' account.

    The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program was 
established by section 101 of title II of the Colorado River 
Basin Salinity Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-320), as 
amended. The program began as a cooperative endeavor by the 
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service [ASCS], 
Soil Conservation Service [SCS], and Extension Service [ES]. 
The Secretary's reorganization transfers the functions of this 
program solely to the NRCS. The program is to assist landowners 
and others in the Colorado River Basin in establishing on-farm 
irrigation management systems and related lateral improvement 
measures to decrease the salt load and sedimentation level in 
the Colorado River and to enhance the supply and quality of 
water available for use in the United States and the Republic 
of Mexico.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program, the 
Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000. This 
amount is $3,500,000 less than the 1995 level, $1,681,000 less 
than the budget request, and $1,000,000 more than the House 
recommended level.

                         conservation programs

Appropriations, 1995....................................................
Budget estimate, 1996...................................................
House allowance.........................................     $36,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

    The House proposes the consolidation of funding for 
resource conservation and development, the forestry incentives 
program, and the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program 
into a single appropriations account.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee does not concur in the House recommendation 
to consolidate funding for resource conservation and 
development, the Forestry Incentives Program, and the Colorado 
River Basin Salinity Control Program under a single account. 
The Committee recommends continued funding of these programs 
under separate appropriations accounts.

                        wetlands reserve program

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $93,200,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     210,000,000
House allowance.........................................     210,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              77,000,000

    The Wetlands Reserve Program [WRP] is authorized by title 
XIV, section 1438 of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and 
Trade Act of 1990 [FACT Act]. As amended by the 1993 Omnibus 
Reconciliation Act, the Secretary is required to enroll not 
less than 330,000 acres by the end of calendar year 1995, and 
not less than 975,000 by the end of calendar year 2000. WRP is 
one component of the larger Environmental Conservation Acreage 
Reserve Program [ECARP], which also includes the existing 
Conservation Reserve Program [CRP]. The primary objectives of 
the WRP are to preserve, protect, and restore wetlands, improve 
wildlife habitat, and protect migratory bird habitat. The 
Secretary of Agriculture, through designated county offices, 
uses program funds to enter into contracts with landowners who 
operate farmed or converted wetlands, farmed wetland or prior 
converted wetlands and adjoining land in CRP or riparian 
corridors. The contracts provide permanent easements or 
easements of 30 years or the maximum allowable under State law. 
Technical assistance is provided by the Natural Resources 
Conservation Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Wetlands Reserve Program, the Committee recommends 
an appropriation of $77,000,000. This amount is $133,000,000 
less than the budget request and the House level, and 
$16,200,000 less than the 1995 amount.
    The Committee includes a provision in the bill restricting 
the acreage to be enrolled in the Wetlands Reserve Program to 
100,000 acres in fiscal year 1996.
    The Committee encourages the Department to enter into an 
agreement with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation for a 
pilot program to support the implementation of the Wetlands 
Reserve Program, as authorized by law (Public Law 101-624, as 
amended). It is expected that this agreement will be for not 
less than $5,000,000 to allow an approximate one-to-one match 
of non-Federal funds provided by the foundation. This agreement 
will support implementation of the WRP by utilizing these funds 
for authorized projects which are mutually agreed to by the 
foundation and the Department. The per-acre costs of this 
agreement, including administrative costs, shall not exceed 
those currently incurred by the Department. It is anticipated 
that this delivery mechanism will result in lower program 
costs, and will lead to new, innovative ways for the delivery 
of Federal conservation programs.

                    Consolidated Farm Service Agency

    The CFSA administers the following conservation programs:

                   agricultural conservation program

Appropriations, 1995....................................    $100,000,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      50,000,000
House allowance.........................................      75,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              50,000,000

    The Agricultural Conservation Program [ACP] is authorized 
by sections 7 to 15, 16(a), 16(f), and 17 of the Soil 
Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act (Public Law 74-46), 
sections 1001-1004, 1006-1008, and 1010 of the Agricultural Act 
of 1970 (Public Law 91-524), as added by the Agricultural and 
Consumer Protection Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-86), section 
1501 of the Food and Agriculture Act of 1977 (Public Law 95-
113), and section 259 of the Energy Security Act of 1980 
(Public Law 96-294).
    The ACP is administered by CFSA through the farmer-elected 
committee system. The program is a joint effort by Government 
and landowners to restore and protect basic land and water 
resources. Objectives include helping to ensure a continuous, 
adequate supply of food and fiber; improving water quality in 
rural America; facilitating resource management systems; and 
achieving national priorities reflected in the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and related legislation.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Agricultural Conservation Program, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $50,000,000. This amount is 
$50,000,000 less than the 1995 level, the same as the budget 
estimate, and $25,000,000 less than the House recommended 
amount.
    Included in the Committee's recommendation is $15,000,000 
for the water quality incentives program, the same as the 
budget request, $4,000,000 more than the House level, and the 
same as the 1995 amount.
    The Cheney Reservoir is a critical component of the water 
supply system for Wichita, KS. The Committee is aware that 
agricultural runoff and sedimentation from soil erosion 
threaten the water quality and longevity of the reservoir. The 
city of Wichita has committed resources to address problem 
areas above the reservoir. The Committee encourages the Service 
to provide assistance in this effort.
    The Committee also recognizes the need in the Lake 
Champlain basin in Vermont for cost share program assistance 
through the Agricultural Conservation Program, and encourages 
the Service to continue to support the structural improvement 
efforts of farmers in the basin through this program.

                     emergency conservation program

Appropriations, 1995....................................         ( \1\ )
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      $3,000,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

\1\ An amount of $23,000,000 is transferred from funding appropriated to 
watershed and flood prevention operations by Public Law 103-211, the 
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1994.

    The appropriation for the Emergency Conservation Program of 
the CFSA funds the activities authorized by the Agricultural 
Credit Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-334). Under the program, the 
Government shares the cost of carrying out approved practices 
to assist and encourage farmers to rehabilitate farmlands 
damaged by natural disasters.
    Assistance is made available to treat new conservation 
problems which: (1) if not treated, will impair or endanger the 
land; (2) materially affect the productive capacity of the 
land; (3) represent damage which is unusual in character and, 
except for wind erosion, is not the type which would recur 
frequently in the same area; and (4) will be so costly to 
rehabilitate that Federal assistance is or will be required to 
return the land to productive agricultural use.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    Due to severe fiscal constraints, the Committee has 
deferred funding for the Emergency Conservation Program. This 
is the same as the 1995 appropriation, $3,000,000 less than the 
budget request, and the same as the House level.

                      conservation reserve program

Appropriations, 1995....................................  $1,743,274,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................   1,926,370,000
House allowance.........................................   1,781,785,000

Committee recommendation

                                                           1,781,785,000

    The Conservation Reserve Program [CRP] authorized by the 
Food Security Act of 1985, as amended by sections 1411-1499 of 
the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 
[FACT Act], was established as a voluntary program to help 
farmers prevent or control the critical soil erosion on highly 
erodible and environmentally sensitive cropland. Unchecked, 
soil erosion would reduce the Nation's long-term capability to 
produce food and fiber and adversely impact water quality and 
wildfire resources.
    The FACT Act, as amended by the Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of 1993, requires that not less than 38 
million acres be enrolled in CRP by the end of 1995.
    The CRP is authorized in all 50 States, Puerto Rico, and 
the Virgin Islands on all cropland meeting the eligibility 
criteria. Cropland is defined as land that has been annually 
tilled to produce an agricultural commodity, including 
sugarcane, other than orchards, vineyards, or ornamental 
planting or has been set aside in a production adjustment 
program in two of the five crop years immediately preceding 
1991 and is suitable for crop production. Alfalfa and other 
grasses and legumes in rotation are considered an agricultural 
commodity for CRP purposes.
    The CRP is administered under the general supervision of 
the Administrator, CFSA, and is carried out in the field by 
State and local CFS committees. Technical assistance is 
provided by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, which 
determines eligibility of the land and assists farmers in 
preparing conservation plans. The Forest Service and 
cooperating State forestry agencies plan for tree planting and 
install planned practices involving trees.
    Under the program, farmers enter into a 10-year contract 
with USDA to take eligible land out of annual crop production 
and put it into permanent vegetative cover. The option of 15-
year contracts is offered to farmers willing to plant trees.
    Farmers decide what eligible cropland to offer for the 
reserve and bid what they would accept for an annual rental 
payment for the 10- or 15-year period at the time of 
application. In addition, farmers receive one-time payments of 
50 percent of the eligible costs of establishing vegetative 
cover on the reserve acreage.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Conservation Reserve Program, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $1,781,785,000. This amount is 
$144,585,000 less than the budget request, the same as the 
House level, and $38,511,000 more than the amount provided for 
1995.
      TITLE III--RURAL ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

    The Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 
(Public Law 103-354) abolishes the Farmers Home Administration, 
Rural Development Administration, and Rural Electrification 
Administration and replaces those agencies with the Rural 
Housing and Community Development Service, Rural Business and 
Cooperative Development Service, and Rural Utilities Service 
and places them under the oversight of the Under Secretary for 
Rural Economic and Community Development. These agencies 
deliver a variety of programs through a network of State, 
district, and county offices.
    In the 1930's and 1940's these agencies were primarily 
involved in making small loans to farmers; however, today these 
agencies have a multibillion dollar loan program throughout all 
America providing loan and grant assistance for single-family 
and multifamily housing, special housing needs, a variety of 
community facilities, infrastructure, and business development 
programs.

    Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Economic and Community 
                              Development

Appropriations, 1995....................................        $568,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     \1\ 586,000
House allowance.........................................         568,000
Committee recommendation................................         568,000

\1\ The 1996 budget proposed that this activity be funded in a single 
account under the Office of the Secretary.

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Economic and 
Community Development provides direction and coordination in 
carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to 
the Department's rural economic and community development 
activities. The Office has oversight and management 
responsibilities for the Rural Housing and Community 
Development Service, Rural Business and Cooperative Development 
Service, and the Rural Utilities Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Economic 
and Community Development, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $568,000. This amount is $18,000 less than the 
budget request, and the same as the House and 1995 levels.

                  Rural Community Advancement Program

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Program      Administrativeexpenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995...........  ...............  ......................
Budget estimate, 1996..........  ...............  ......................
House allowance................  ...............  ......................
Committee recommendation.......     $528,839,000          $58,051,000   
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Rural Community Advancement Program consolidates 
funding for the following existing programs:
    Rural Housing and Community Development Service: Direct 
community facility loans; guaranteed community facility loans; 
and rental housing (sec. 515) loans for new construction.
    Rural Business and Cooperative Development Service: 
Guaranteed rural business and industry loans; and rural 
business enterprise grants.
    Rural Utilities Service: Rural water and waste disposal 
loans; rural water and waste disposal grants; and solid waste 
management grants.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends $528,839,000 for the Rural 
Community Advancement Program, in addition, $58,051,000 is 
provided for administrative expenses associated with the 
delivery of these programs. This is a proposed consolidation of 
funding for programs funded in other accounts in the House bill 
and budget request.
    The Committee earmarks $20,044,000 of the funds provided 
for empowerment zones and enterprise communities.
    Rural business enterprise grants.--Of the amount made 
available for rural business enterprise grants, the Committee 
recommends $500,000 for rural transportation systems technical 
assistance.
    The Committee is aware of and encourages the Department to 
give consideration to the following rural business enterprise 
grant applications: television demonstration grants; Institute 
for Decision Making, Iowa; MidSouth Delta Local Initiative 
Support Corp., Mississippi; South Dakota Corporation for Rural 
Development, South Dakota; Lincoln, KS, Industrial Park, 
Kansas; Sea Island Community Development Corp., South Carolina; 
Oregon Trail Interpretive Center, Oregon; Vermont Interactive 
Television, Vermont; Vermont MEDNET, Vermont; Enterprise 
Corporation of the Delta, Mississippi; Union County, PA, 
Business Park, Pennsylvania; Hawaii Small Business Development 
Center; rural community revitalization, Hawaii; and specialty 
food producers, Vermont.
    Rural water and waste disposal loans and grants.--Of the 
amount made available for rural water and waste disposal loans 
and grants, the Committee is aware of, and urges the Department 
to give consideration to, loan and/or grant applications from: 
the city of Yelm, WA; Centertown, KY; the county of Harford, 
MD; and communities on the islands of Kauai and Hawaii. The 
Committee also is aware of interest in installing dry fire 
hydrants to enhance firefighting capabilities in rural areas 
and urges the Department to give consideration to providing 
funding to assist in these efforts.

        Rural Housing and Community Development Service Programs

    The Rural Housing and Community Development Service [RHCDS] 
was established under the Department of Agriculture 
Reorganization Act of 1994, dated October 13, 1994 (Public Law 
103-354). Its programs were previously administered by the 
Farmers Home Administration and the Rural Development 
Administration.
    The mission of the Service is to improve the quality of 
life in rural America by assisting rural residents and 
communities in obtaining adequate and affordable housing and 
access to needed community facilities. The goals and objectives 
are: (1) to facilitate the economic revitalization of rural 
areas by providing direct and indirect economic benefits to 
individual borrowers, families, and rural communities; (2) to 
assure that benefits are communicated to all program-eligible 
customers with special outreach efforts to target resources to 
underserved, impoverished, or economically declining rural 
areas; (3) to lower the cost of programs while retaining the 
benefits by redesigning more effective programs that work in 
partnership with State and local governments and the private 
sector; and (4) to leverage the economic benefits through the 
use of low-cost credit programs, especially guaranteed loans.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The following table presents program levels recommended by 
the Committee for loan and grant programs administered by the 
Rural Housing and Community Development Service, compared to 
the 1995 levels and the 1996 budget request and House 
recommended levels:

                rural housing and community development

                         loan and grant levels

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                House        Committee  
                    1995 level  1996 budget   allowance   recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Housing                                                           
 Insurance Fund                                                         
 Program Account:                                                       
    Low-income                                                          
     housing                                                            
     (sec. 502):                                                        
        Direct...    1,200,000    1,200,000     550,000       1,000,000 
        Guarantee                                                       
         d.......    1,000,000    1,300,000   1,700,000       1,700,000 
    Housing                                                             
     repair (sec.                                                       
     504)........       35,000       35,000      35,000          35,000 
    Farm labor                                                          
     housing                                                            
     (sec. 514)..       15,915       16,482      15,000          15,000 
    Rental                                                              
     housing                                                            
     (sec. 515)..      190,476  \1\ 170,000     150,000         150,000 
    Site loans                                                          
     (sec. 524)..          632          632         600             600 
    Credit sales                                                        
     of acquired                                                        
     property....  ...........       75,000      35,000          42,484 
                  ------------------------------------------------------
      Total,                                                            
       rural                                                            
       housing                                                          
       loan                                                             
       programs..    2,442,023    2,797,114   2,485,600       2,943,084 
                  ======================================================
Self-help housing                                                       
 land development          603          603         603             603 
                  ======================================================
Community                                                               
 Facility Loans                                                         
 Program:                                                               
    Direct.......      225,000      ( \2\ )     200,000         ( \3\ ) 
    Guaranteed...       75,000      ( \2\ )      75,000         ( \3\ ) 
                  ------------------------------------------------------
      Total,                                                            
       Rural                                                            
       Community                                                        
       Facility                                                         
       Loans                                                            
       Program...      300,000      ( \2\ )     275,000         ( \3\ ) 
                  ======================================================
Rural Housing and                                                       
 Community                                                              
 Development                                                            
 Service grants                                                         
 and payments:                                                          
    Very low-                                                           
     income                                                             
     housing                                                            
     repair                                                             
     grants......       24,900       24,900      24,900          24,900 
    Rural housing                                                       
     for domestic                                                       
     farm labor..       10,900       10,900      10,000          10,000 
    Mutual and                                                          
     self-help                                                          
     housing.....       12,650       12,650      12,650          12,650 
    Supervisory                                                         
     and                                                                
     technical                                                          
     assistance                                                         
     grants......  ...........        2,500  ...........          1,000 
    Rural                                                               
     community                                                          
     fire                                                               
     protection                                                         
     grants......        3,400      ( \2\ )       1,000           3,000 
    Compensation                                                        
     for                                                                
     construction                                                       
     defects.....          495          495         495             495 
    Rural housing                                                       
     preservation                                                       
     grants......       22,000       22,000      11,000          11,000 
    Rental                                                              
     assistance..      523,008      571,483     535,900         540,900 
                  ------------------------------------------------------
      Total,                                                            
       Rural                                                            
       Housing                                                          
       and                                                              
       Community                                                        
       Developmen                                                       
       t Service                                                        
       grants and                                                       
       payments..      597,353      644,928     595,945         603,945 
                  ------------------------------------------------------
      Total,                                                            
       RHCDS                                                            
       loans and                                                        
       grants....    3,339,979    3,442,645   3,357,148       3,547,632 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes $50,000,000 for new construction included in the proposed  
  Rural Development Performance Partnerships Program.                   
\2\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships     
  Program.                                                              
\3\ Included in proposed Rural Community Advancement Program.           

              rural housing insurance fund program account

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Guaranteed                   
                        Insured loans        loans         Total loans  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995.   $1,442,023,000   $1,000,000,000   $2,442,023,000
Budget estimate, 1996    1,497,114,000    1,300,000,000    2,797,114,000
House allowance......      785,600,000    1,700,000,000    2,485,600,000
Committee                                                               
 recommendation......    1,243,084,000    1,700,000,000    2,943,084,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Rural Housing Insurance Fund was established under the 
authority contained in section 1003(a) of the Housing and Urban 
Development Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-117), approved August 
10, 1965. Public Law 89-117 authorized an appropriation of such 
sums as may be necessary for the purposes of the fund.
    This fund may be used to insure or guarantee rural housing 
loans; loans for purchasing new or existing rural homes, loans 
for modernizing or improving rural dwellings, especially in 
order to make them safer or more sanitary; loans for rural 
rental and cooperative housing; farm labor housing loans; rural 
housing site loans; and mobile home park loans. Beginning in 
fiscal year 1978, rental assistance payments were made from the 
fund. Loan programs are limited to rural areas which include 
towns, villages, and other places of not more than 10,000 
population, which are not part of an urban area, and areas with 
a population in excess of 10,000 but less than 20,000 if such 
area is not included in a standard metropolitan statistical 
area [SMSA] and has a serious lack of mortgage credit for low- 
and moderate-income borrowers.
    This fund provides a variety of loans, within the income 
categories mentioned, including the following low-income 
housing assistance: subsidized loans for repairs, general 
purpose loans, domestic farm labor loans, and rental or 
cooperative loans. Unsubsidized loans for low-income persons 
include general purpose loans, site loans, and certain repair 
loans.
    Very low-income housing repair loans (sec. 504).--Loans are 
made to eligible very low-income applicants who are owners of 
farms or nonfarm rural property, for the purpose of improving 
or modernizing a rural dwelling, making the dwellings safer or 
more sanitary, or removing hazards. The Secretary determines 
the maximum amount of the loan. These secured loans are made at 
1 percent interest and are repayable within 20 years, except 
that a loan for less than $2,500 need only be secured by a 
promissory note.
    Rural housing building and repair loans (sec. 502).--Loans 
are made to enable eligible low-income applicants to purchase, 
construct, improve, alter, repair, or replace dwellings in 
rural areas, if their need for necessary housing cannot be met 
with financial assistance from other sources. Not less than 40 
percent of the funding authorized nationally shall be set aside 
and 30 percent in each State will be available for very low-
income families. These loans bear a note rate based on the cost 
of money to the Treasury with provisions for interest credit 
which may reduce the interest rate to as low as 1 percent under 
certain circumstances. Such loans may not exceed amounts 
necessary to provide adequate housing, modest in size, design, 
and cost.
    Rural rental and cooperative building loans (sec. 515).--
Loans are authorized to be made to individuals, corporations, 
Indian tribes, associations, public bodies, trusts, or 
partnerships to provide moderate cost rental or cooperative 
housing and related facilities for elderly or handicapped 
persons or families and other persons of low and moderate 
income in rural areas. Repaired or rehabilitated rental 
projects are encouraged in order to provide affordable housing. 
These loans are repayable in not more than 50 years and 
currently bear a note rate based on the cost of money to the 
Treasury with provision for interest credit to tenants which 
may reduce the interest rate to as low as 1 percent under 
certain circumstances. These loans are made only if the need 
for necessary housing cannot be met with financial assistance 
from other sources except in the case of public bodies.
    Farm labor housing loans (sec. 514).--Loans are authorized 
to be made to a farm owner, to certain public or broad-based 
private nonprofit organizations, public bodies, or to a 
nonprofit organization of farm workers to provide modest living 
quarters, basic household furnishing, and related facilities, 
including land necessary for an adequate site, for domestic 
farm labor. Loans will be made based on a determination of need 
considering housing needs of domestic farm labor, including 
migrant farm workers in the area, without regard to other 
housing needs in the area. These loans are repayable in not 
more than 33 years and bear interest not in excess of 1 
percent, except under certain circumstances. Loans to 
organizations may be made simultaneously with farm labor 
housing grants which are discussed elsewhere in this report.
    Rural housing site loans (sec. 524) (unsubsidized).--Loans 
are made for purchase and development of land to be subdivided 
into building sites for low- to moderate-income housing 
borrowers and rural rental and cooperative housing borrowers. 
Insured loans are made at a note rate based on the cost of 
money to the Treasury, and are repayable in 2 years.
    Credit sales of acquired property.--Property is sold out of 
inventory and is made to an eligible buyer by providing him 
with a RHCDS loan.

       estimated loan subsidy and administrative expenses levels

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Guaranteed                    Administrative
                                                      Insured      loan subsidy    Total subsidy     expenses   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995............................    $347,121,000     $17,200,000    $364,321,000    $389,818,000
Budget estimates, 1996..........................     381,601,000       2,210,000     383,811,000     395,211,000
House allowance.................................     226,402,000       2,890,000     229,292,000     385,889,000
Committee recommendation........................     322,162,000       2,890,000     325,052,000     389,818,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated and loan guarantees committed in 1996, as well 
as for administrative expenses.

                       committee recommendations

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

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      1995                      House        Committee  
                    enacted    1996 budget    allowance   recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan subsidies:                                                         
    Low-income                                                          
     housing                                                            
     (sec. 502):                                                        
        Direct..      227,520      251,880      115,445         209,900 
        Guarante                                                        
         ed.....       17,200        2,210        2,890           2,890 
    Housing                                                             
     repair                                                             
     (sec. 504).       11,690       14,193       14,193          14,193 
    Farm labor                                                          
     housing                                                            
     (sec. 514).        7,911        9,482        8,629           8,629 
    Rental                                                              
     housing                                                            
     (sec. 515).  \1\ 100,000       92,973       82,035          82,035 
        Guarante                                                        
         ed loan                                                        
         demonst                                                        
         ration                                                         
         program  ...........  ...........   \2\ (1,000)  ..............
    Site loans                                                          
     (sec. 524).  ...........  ...........  ............  ..............
    Credit sales                                                        
     of acquired                                                        
     property...  ...........       13,073        6,100           7,405 
                 -------------------------------------------------------
      Total,                                                            
       loan                                                             
       subsidies      364,321      383,811      229,292         325,052 
                 -------------------------------------------------------
RHIF                                                                    
 administrative                                                         
 expenses.......      389,818      395,211      385,889         389,818 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects enacted rescission of $15,500,000.                         
\2\ Subject to enactment of authorizing legislation.                    

                       rental assistance program

Appropriations, 1995....................................    $523,008,000
Budget estimate, 1996................................... \1\ 571,483,000
House allowance.........................................     535,900,000
Committee recommendation................................     540,900,000

\1\ Excludes $15,517,000 in rental assistance for new construction 
included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships Program.

    The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 
established a rural rental assistance program to be 
administered by the former Farmers Home Administration through 
the rural housing loans programs.
    The objective of the program is to reduce rents paid by 
low-income families living in Rural Housing and Community 
Development Service financed rental projects and farm labor 
housing projects. Under this program, low-income tenants will 
contribute the higher of: (1) 30 percent of monthly adjusted 
income; (2) 10 percent of monthly income; or (3) designated 
housing payments from a welfare agency.
    Payments from the fund are made to the project owner for 
the difference between the tenant's payment and the approved 
rental rate established for the unit.
    The program is administered in tandem with Rural Housing 
and Community Development Service section 515 rural rental and 
cooperative housing programs and the farm labor loan and grant 
programs. Priority is given to existing projects for units 
occupied by low-income families to renew expiring contracts. 
Remaining funding will be used for projects receiving new 
construction commitments under sections 514, 515, or 516 for 
very low-income families with certain limitations and to 
provide additional rental assistance units to existing 
projects.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For rural rental assistance payments, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $540,900,000. This amount is 
$30,583,000 less than the budget request, $5,000,000 more than 
the House level, and $17,892,000 more than the 1995 amount.

        self-help housing land development fund program account

Loan level, 1995........................................        $603,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................         603,000
House allowance.........................................         603,000

Committee recommendation

                                                                 603,000

    This fund is authorized by section 523(b)(1)(B) of the 
Housing Act of 1949, as amended. It is used as a revolving fund 
for making loans to public and private nonprofit organizations 
for the acquisition and development of land as building sites 
to be subdivided and sold to eligible families, nonprofit 
organizations, and cooperatives.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For self-help housing land development loans, the Committee 
recommends $603,000. This amount is the same as the House 
level, the budget request, and the 1995 level.

       estimated loan subsidy and administrative expenses levels

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Insured loan   Administrative
                                              subsidy        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995....................         $11,000         $14,000
Budget estimates, 1996..................          31,000  ..............
House allowance.........................          31,000  ..............
Committee recommendation................          31,000  ..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated in 1996, as well as for administrative 
expenses.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the self-help housing land development fund program 
account, the Committee recommends $31,000 for the subsidy cost 
of the loan program under credit reform, and no appropriation 
for administrative expenses. These amounts are the same as the 
budget request and the House levels, and $20,000 more than the 
1995 subsidy appropriation and $14,000 less than the 1995 
administrative expenses appropriation.

             rural community facility loans program account

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Insured loans   Guaranteed loans     Total loans  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan level, 1995..      $225,000,000       $75,000,000      $300,000,000
Budget estimates,                                                       
 1996 \1\.........  ................  ................  ................
House allowance...       200,000,000        75,000,000       275,000,000
Committee                                                               
 recommendation \2                                                      
 \................  ................  ................  ................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships     
  Program.                                                              
\2\ Included in Rural Community Advancement Program.                    

    This fund, created by the Rural Development Act of 1972, 
finances a variety of rural community facilities.
    Community facility loans.--Loans are made to organizations, 
including certain Indian tribes and corporations not operated 
for profit and public and quasi-public agencies, to construct, 
enlarge, extend, or otherwise improve community facilities 
providing essential services to rural residents. Such 
facilities include those providing or supporting overall 
community development such as fire and rescue services, health 
care, transportation, community, social, and cultural benefits. 
Loans are made for facilities which primarily serve rural 
residents of open country and rural towns and villages of not 
more than 20,000 people. Health care and fire and rescue 
facilities are the priorities of the program and receive the 
majority of available funds.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee includes funding for this program in the 
Rural Community Advancement Program. The budget requests 
funding for this program in the proposed Rural Development 
Performance Partnerships Program. The House recommends 
$200,000,000 for insured and $75,000,000 for guaranteed rural 
community facility loans. For fiscal year 1995, $225,000,000 is 
available for insured loans and $75,000,000 for guaranteed 
loans.

       estimated loan subsidy and administrative expenses levels

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Insured loan     Guaranteed                    Administrative
                                                      subsidy      loan subsidy    Total subsidy     expenses   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995............................     $21,375,000      $3,728,000     $25,103,000  ..............
Budget estimates, 1996 \1\......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
House allowance.................................      34,880,000       3,555,000      38,435,000      $8,836,000
Committee recommendation \2\....................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships Program.                                    
\2\ Included in Rural Community Advancement Program.                                                            


    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated and loan guarantees committed in 1996, as well 
as for administrative expenses.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee includes funding for this program in the 
Rural Community Advancement Program. The budget estimate 
includes loan subsidy costs in the proposed Rural Development 
Performance Partnerships Program. The House recommends a total 
loan subsidy appropriation of $38,435,000 and an administrative 
expenses appropriation of $8,836,000. The fiscal year 1995 
subsidy appropriation totals $25,103,000.

                 very low-income housing repair grants

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $24,900,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      24,900,000
House allowance.........................................      24,900,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              24,900,000

    This grant program is authorized under section 504 of title 
V of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended. The rural housing 
repair grant program is carried out by making grants to very 
low-income families to make necessary repairs to their homes in 
order to make such dwellings safe and sanitary, and remove 
hazards to the health of the occupants, their families, or the 
community.
    These grants may be made to cover the cost of improvements 
or additions, such as repairing roofs, providing toilet 
facilities, providing a convenient and sanitary water supply, 
supplying screens, repairing or providing structural supports 
or making similar repairs, additions, or improvements, 
including all preliminary and installation costs in obtaining 
central water and sewer service. A grant can be made in 
combination with a section 504 very low-income housing repair 
loan.
    No assistance can be extended to any one individual in the 
form of a loan, grant, or combined loans and grant in excess of 
$5,000 and grant assistance is limited to persons, or families 
headed by persons, who are 62 years of age or older.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For very low-income repair grants, the Committee recommends 
an appropriation of $24,900,000. This amount is the same as the 
amount provided for 1995, the budget request, and the House 
proposed level.

                 rural housing for domestic farm labor

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $10,900,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      10,900,000
House allowance.........................................      10,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              10,000,000

    Financial assistance in the form of grants is authorized to 
public or private nonprofit organizations or other eligible 
organizations for low-rent housing and related facilities for 
domestic farm labor.
    Under section 516 of the Housing Act of 1949, the Rural 
Housing and Community Development Service is authorized to 
share with States or other political subdivisions, public or 
private nonprofit organizations, or nonprofit organizations of 
farmworkers, the cost of providing low-rent housing, basic 
household furnishings, and related facilities to be used by 
domestic farm laborers. Such housing may be for year-round or 
seasonal occupancy and consist of family units, apartments, or 
dormitory-type units, constructed in an economical manner, and 
not of elaborate or extravagant design or materials. Grant 
assistance may not exceed 90 percent of the total development 
cost. Applicants furnish as much of the development cost as 
they can afford by using their own resources, by borrowing 
either directly from private sources, or by obtaining an 
insured loan under section 514 of the Housing Act. The 
applicant must agree to charge rentals which do not exceed 
amounts approved by the Secretary, maintain the housing at all 
times in a safe and sanitary condition, and give occupancy 
preference to domestic farm laborers.
    The obligations incurred by the applicant as a condition of 
the grant continue for 50 years from the date of the grant 
unless sooner terminated by the Rural Housing and Community 
Development Service. Grant obligations are secured by a 
mortgage of the housing or other security. In the event of 
default, the Rural Housing and Community Development Service 
has the option to require repayment of the grant.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For grants for rural housing for domestic farm labor, the 
Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,000,000. This 
amount is the same as the House level, and $900,000 less than 
the budget request and the 1995 amount.

                  mutual and self-help housing grants

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $12,650,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      12,650,000
House allowance.........................................      12,650,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              12,650,000

    This grant program is authorized by title V of the Housing 
Act of 1949, as amended. Grants are made to local organizations 
to promote the development of mutual or self-help programs 
under which groups of usually 6 to 10 families build their own 
homes by mutually exchanging labor. Funds may be used to pay 
the cost of construction supervisors who will work with 
families in the construction of their homes and for 
administrative expenses of the organizations providing the 
self-help assistance.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For mutual and self-help housing grants, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $12,650,000. This amount is the 
same as the amount provided for 1995, the budget request, and 
the House proposed level.

              supervisory and technical assistance grants

Appropriations, 1995....................................................
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      $2,500,000
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                                               1,000,000

    This program is authorized under section 509(f)(6) of the 
National Affordable Housing Act and section 525 of the Housing 
Act of 1949. The program allows grants to be made to nonprofit 
organizations to assist with rural housing preparation, 
development, and management in underserved and poor counties.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For supervisory and technical assistance grants, the 
Committee recommends $1,000,000. This amount is $1,000,000 more 
than the 1995 appropriation, $1,500,000 less than the budget 
estimate, and $1,000,000 more than the House level.

                 rural community fire protection grants

Appropriations, 1995....................................      $3,400,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................         ( \1\ )
House allowance.........................................       1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,000,000

\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships 
Program.

    Rural community fire protection grants are authorized by 
section 7 of the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978. 
Grants are made to public bodies to organize, train, and equip 
local firefighting forces, including those of Indian tribes or 
other native groups, to prevent, control, and suppress fires 
threatening human lives, crops, livestock, farmsteads or other 
improvements, pastures, orchards, wildlife, rangeland, 
woodland, and other resources in rural areas.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For rural community fire protection grants, the Committee 
recommends $3,000,000. This amount is $400,000 less than the 
1995 appropriation, and $2,000,000 more than the House level. 
The budget estimate includes funding for this program in the 
proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships Program.

                 compensation for construction defects

Appropriations, 1995....................................        $495,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................         495,000
House allowance.........................................         495,000

Committee recommendation

                                                                 495,000

    This program is authorized under section 509(c) of the 
Housing Act of 1949, as amended. The Secretary of Agriculture 
is authorized to make expenditures to correct structural 
defects, or to pay claims of owners arising from such defects 
on newly constructed dwellings purchased with RHCDS financial 
assistance. Claims will not be paid until provisions under the 
builder's warranty have been fully pursued. Requests for 
compensation for construction defects must be made within 18 
months of loan closing.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends $495,000 for compensation for 
construction defects. This amount is the same as the House 
recommendation, the budget request, and the 1995 level.

                   rural housing preservation grants

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $22,000,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      22,000,000
House allowance.........................................      11,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              11,000,000

    Section 522 of the Housing and Urban-Rural Recovery Act of 
1983 authorizes the Rural Housing and Community Development 
Service to administer a program of home repair directed at low- 
and very low-income people.
    Nationally, with only one-fourth of the population, rural 
areas have over 50 percent of the units lacking plumbing and 
over one-third of the units considered substandard.
    The rural housing preservation grants program seeks to 
attack this problem by forging a working relationship between 
RHCDS and public bodies and nonprofit institutions capable of 
carrying out a program of home repair.
    The purpose of the preservation program is to improve the 
delivery of rehabilitation assistance by employing the 
expertise of housing organizations at the local level. Eligible 
applicants will compete on a State-by-State basis for grant 
funds. These funds may be administered as loans, loan 
writedowns, or grants to finance home repair. The program will 
be administered by local grantees.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For rural housing preservation grants, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $11,000,000. This amount is 
$11,000,000 less than the 1995 level and the budget estimate, 
and the same as the House proposal.

            Rural Housing and Community Development Service

                         salaries and expenses

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Transfers from                   
                     Appropriations    other accounts         Total     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations,                                                         
 1995.............  ................      $389,818,000      $389,818,000
Budget estimates,                                                       
 1996.............       $53,650,000       393,359,000       447,009,000
House allowance...        42,820,000       381,800,000       424,620,000
Committee                                                               
 recommendation...        50,346,000       377,031,000       427,377,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These funds are used to administer the loan and grant 
programs of the Rural Housing and Community Development Service 
including reviewing applications, making and collecting loans, 
and providing technical assistance and guidance to borrowers; 
and to assist in extending other Federal programs to people in 
rural areas.
    Under credit reform administrative costs associated with 
loan programs are appropriated to the program accounts for the 
rural housing insurance fund and rural community facility 
loans. Appropriations to the ``Salaries and expenses'' account 
are for costs associated with grant programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For salaries and expenses of the Rural Housing and 
Community Development Service, including transfers from other 
accounts, the Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$427,377,000. This amount is $2,757,000 more than the House 
level, $19,632,000 less than the budget request, and 
$37,559,000 more than the 1995 amount.
    The Committee does not concur with House report language 
directing the solicitation of competitive bids for the 
operation of a centralized loan servicing facility. The 
Committee supports centralized servicing of the section 502 
housing loan portfolio and urges the Department to continue 
development of a system that will provide maximum savings 
within acceptable requirements of borrower assistance. The 
Committee believes this is an issue more appropriately 
addressed by the authorizing committees of jurisdiction. The 
Committee also believes the General Accounting Office needs 
adequate time to carefully analyze the costs and benefits of 
retaining the operation of this facility by the Rural Housing 
and Community Development Service. Therefore, solicitation of 
competitive bids at this time would be premature.

           Rural Business and Cooperative Development Service

    The Rural Business and Cooperative Development Service 
[RBCDS] was established under the Department of Agriculture 
Reorganization Act of 1994, dated October 13, 1994 (Public Law 
103-354). Its programs were previously administered by the 
Rural Development Administration and the Rural Electrification 
Administration.
    The mission of the Rural Business and Cooperative 
Development Service is to enhance the quality of life for all 
rural residents by assisting new and existing cooperatives and 
other businesses through partnership with rural communities. 
The goals and objectives are to: (1) promote a stable business 
environment in rural America through financial assistance, 
sound business planning, technical assistance, appropriate 
research, education, and information; (2) support 
environmentally sensitive economic growth that meets the needs 
of the entire community; and (3) assure that the Service 
benefits are available to all segments of the rural community, 
with emphasis on those most in need.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The following table presents the Committee's recommended 
program levels for loans and grants administered by the Rural 
Business and Cooperative Development Service, as compared to 
the 1995 levels, the budget request, and the House levels.

                      LOAN AND GRANT PROGRAM LEVELS                     
                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Committee
                     1995 level  1996 budget  Houseallowance   recommen-
                                                                dation  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Business and                                                      
 Cooperative                                                            
 Development                                                            
 Service:                                                               
    Rural Business                                                      
     and Industry                                                       
     Loans Program:                                                     
        Direct.....  ..........      ( \1\ )  ..............     ( \3\ )
        Guaranted..     500,000      ( \1\ )       500,000       ( \3\ )
                    ----------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal,                                                     
           Rural                                                        
           Business                                                     
           and                                                          
           Industry                                                     
           Loans                                                        
           Program.     500,000      ( \1\ )       500,000       ( \3\ )
                    ====================================================
Rural development                                                       
 loan fund.........      88,038      ( \1\ )         7,246        30,000
Rural economic                                                          
 development loans.      12,865       14,091        12,865        12,865
Alternative                                                             
 agricultural                                                           
 research and                                                           
 commercialization                                                      
 loans.............  ..........       25,000  ..............  ..........
                    ----------------------------------------------------
      Total, RBCDS                                                      
       loans.......     600,903       39,091       520,111        42,865
                    ====================================================
Rural business and                                                      
 community                                                              
 development                                                            
 grants:                                                                
    Rural business                                                      
     enterprise                                                         
     grants........      47,500      ( \1\ )        45,000       ( \3\ )
    Local technical                                                     
     assistance and                                                     
     planning                                                           
     grants........     ( \2\ )      ( \1\ )  ..............  ..........
    Rural                                                               
     technology and                                                     
     cooperative                                                        
     development                                                        
     grants........       1,750      ( \1\ )         1,500         1,500
    Alternative                                                         
     agricultural                                                       
     research and                                                       
     commercializat                                                     
     ion                                                                
     cooperative                                                        
     agreements....       5,000        8,000         5,000        10,000
                    ----------------------------------------------------
        Total,                                                          
         RBCDS                                                          
         grants....      54,250        8,000        51,500        11,500
                    ----------------------------------------------------
        Total,                                                          
         RBCDS                                                          
         loans and                                                      
         grants....     655,153       47,091       571,611        54,365
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships     
  Program.                                                              
\2\ Reflects enacted rescission of $1,750,000.                          
\3\ Included in proposed Rural Community Advancement Program.           

           rural business and industry loans program account

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Insured loans   Guaranteed loans     Total loans  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan level, 1995..  ................      $500,000,000      $500,000,000
Budget estimates,                                                       
 1996 \1\.........  ................  ................  ................
House allowance...  ................       500,000,000       500,000,000
Committee                                                               
 recommendation...  ................           ( \2\ )           ( \2\ )
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships     
  Program.                                                              
\2\ Included in Rural Community Advancement Program.                    

    This fund created by the Rural Development Act of 1972, 
finances a variety of rural industrial development loans.
    Rural industrialization loans.--Loans for rural 
industrialization and rural community facilities are authorized 
under the Rural Development Act amendments to the Consolidated 
Farm and Rural Development Act authorities. Business and 
industrial loans are made to public, private, or cooperative 
organizations organized for profit, to certain Indian tribes, 
or to individuals for the purpose of improving, developing or 
financing business, industry, and employment or improving the 
economic and environmental climate in rural areas. Such 
purposes include financing business and industrial acquisition, 
construction, enlargement, repair or modernization, financing 
the purchase and development of land, easements, rights-of-way, 
buildings, payment of startup costs, and supplying working 
capital. Industrial development loans may be made in any area 
that is not within the outer boundary of any city having a 
population of 50,000 or more and not immediately adjacent 
urbanized and urbanizing areas with a population density of 
more than 100 persons per square mile. Special consideration 
for such loans is given to rural areas and cities having a 
population of less than 25,000.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee includes funding for this program in the 
Rural Community Advancement Program. The budget estimate 
includes funding for this program in the Proposed Rural 
Development Performance Partnerships Program. The House 
recommends $500,000,000 for guaranteed loans, the same as the 
fiscal year 1995 level.

       estimated loan subsidy and administrative expenses levels

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Insured loan     Guaranteed                    Administrative
                                                      subsidy      loan subsidy    Total subsidy     expenses   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995............................  ..............      $4,750,000      $4,750,000  ..............
Budget estimates, 1996 \1\......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
House allowance.................................  ..............       6,437,000       6,437,000     $14,868,000
Committee recommendation........................  ..............         ( \2\ )         ( \2\ )         ( \2\ )
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships Program.                                    
\2\ Included in Rural Community Advancement Program.                                                            

    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated and loan guarantees committed in 1996, as well 
as for administrative expenses.

              rural development loan fund program account

                                                           Insured loans

Loan level, 1995........................................     $88,038,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................         ( \1\ )
House allowance.........................................       7,246,000
Committee recommendation................................      30,000,000

\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships 
Program.

    The rural development loan program was originally 
authorized by the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 (Public Law 
88-452).
    The making of rural development loans by the Department of 
Agriculture is reauthorized by Public Law 99-425, the Human 
Services Reauthorization Act of 1986.
    Loans are made to intermediary borrowers (small investment 
groups) who in turn reloan the funds to rural businesses, 
community development corporations, private nonprofit 
organizations, public agencies, and others, for the purpose of 
improving business, industry, community facilities, and 
employment opportunities and diversification of the economy in 
rural areas.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For rural development loans, the Committee recommends a 
total loan level of $30,000,000. This is $58,038,000 less than 
the 1995 amount, $22,754,000 more than the House level, and 
$30,000,000 more than the budget request.
    The Committee also recommends an earmark of $10,870,000 for 
empowerment zones and enterprise communities, the same amount 
as proposed in the budget request, and $3,624,000 more than the 
amount recommended by the House.
    The Committee is aware of and encourages the Department to 
give consideration to an Intermediary Relending Program 
application from Coastal Enterprises, Inc., of Maine.

       estimated loan subsidy and administrative expenses levels

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Direct                             
                                   loansubsidy    Administrativeexpenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995..........       $46,000,000           $1,476,000   
Budget estimate, 1996 \1\.....  ................  ......................
House allowance...............         4,322,000  ......................
Committee recommendation......        17,895,000            1,476,000   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships     
  Program.                                                              

    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated in 1996, as well as for administrative 
expenses.

            rural economic development loans program account

                                                           Insured loans

Loan level, 1995........................................     $12,865,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      14,091,000
House allowance.........................................      12,865,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              12,865,000

    The rural economic development loans program was 
established by the Reconciliation Act of December 1987 (Public 
Law 100-203), which amended the Rural Electrification Act of 
1936 by establishing a new section 313. This section of the 
Rural Electrification Act (7 U.S.C. 901) establishes a cushion 
of credits payment program and creates the rural economic 
development subaccount. The Administrator of RBCDS is 
authorized under the act to utilize funds in this program to 
provide zero interest loans to electric and telecommunications 
borrowers for the purpose of promoting rural economic 
development and job creation projects, including funding for 
feasibility studies, startup costs, and other reasonable 
expenses for the purpose of fostering rural economic 
development.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For rural economic development loans, the Committee 
recommends a total loan level of $12,865,000. This is the same 
as the 1995 level and the House level, and $1,226,000 less than 
the budget request.

       estimated loan subsidy and administrative expenses levels

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Insured                            
                                   loansubsidy    Administrativeexpenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995..........        $3,077,000  ......................
Budget estimate, 1996.........         4,085,000             $864,000   
House allowance...............         3,729,000              584,000   
Committee recommendation......         3,729,000              724,000   
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated in 1996, as well as for administrative 
expenses.

                       committee recommendations

    For rural economic development loans, the Committee 
recommends $3,729,000 for the loan subsidy costs under credit 
reform. This amount is $652,000 more than the 1995 level, 
$356,000 less than the budget request, and the same as the 
House level.

        alternative agricultural research and commercialization

                             revolving fund

                         cooperative agreements

Appropriations, 1995....................................  \1\ $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................       8,000,000
House allowance.........................................       5,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              10,000,000

\1\ Reflects enacted rescission of $1,500,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 loans

Loan level, 1995........................................................
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     $25,000,000
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

    The Alternative Agricultural Research and Commercialization 
Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5901 et seq.) authorizes the provision of 
assistance on a competitive basis to foster the development and 
commercialization of new nonfood, nonfeed products derived from 
agricultural and forestry materials and animal byproducts. 
Development of nontraditional uses for farm, ranch, and 
forestry products provides an opportunity to improve U.S. 
competitiveness in foreign markets, support rural development 
and provide employment opportunities in rural areas, address 
environmental concerns, and lower farm program costs. Programs 
are managed by the Alternative Agricultural Research and 
Commercialization [AARC] Center which was established by the 
Secretary of Agriculture on March 18, 1992. Program policy and 
oversight is provided by a board which is composed of Federal 
and private sector scientists, producers, and business experts.
    The alternative agricultural research and commercialization 
revolving fund (7 U.S.C. 5908) is available to carry out the 
authorized programs and activities of the Center. The revolving 
fund also contains fees and royalties, donations, and other 
funds received by the AARC Center. Funds support the 
development and commercialization of new industrial and 
consumer products and uses for agricultural and forestry 
materials, with preference for projects that benefit rural 
communities, and are environmentally friendly.
    Support may be provided through competitively awarded 
grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements. These 
investments are repayable to the AARC revolving fund. Ultimate 
commercial interest in projects is assured through private 
sector representation on the AARC Board and project selection 
criteria that require the matching of funds and incorporate the 
sharing of resources and risks (cash and expertise). AARC 
programs complement research on new uses conducted by the 
Agricultural Research Service and Forest Service at Federal 
labs, and grant programs managed by the Cooperative State 
Research, Education, and Extension Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For alternative agricultural research and commercialization 
cooperative agreements, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $10,000,000. This is $5,000,000 more than the 
1995 amount, $2,000,000 more than the budget request, and 
$5,000,000 more than the House level.
    For alternative agricultural research and commercialization 
loans, the Committee recommends no funding. This is $25,000,000 
less than the budget request, and the same as the House level. 
This is a proposed new program not funded for fiscal year 1995.

       estimated loan subsidy and administrative expenses levels

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Insured                            
                                   loansubsidy    Administrativeexpenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995..........  ................  ......................
Budget estimate, 1996.........        $7,138,000             $500,000   
House allowance...............  ................                        
                                     ...........  ......................
Committee recommendation......  ................  ......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated in 1996, as well as for administrative 
expenses.

                    rural business enterprise grants

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $47,500,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................         ( \1\ )
House allowance.........................................      45,000,000
Committee recommendation................................         ( \2\ )

\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships 
Program.
\2\ Included in Rural Community Advancement Program.

    This program is authorized by the Rural Development Act of 
1972. Grants are made to public bodies and nonprofit 
organizations to facilitate development of small and emerging 
business enterprises in rural areas, including the acquisition 
and development of land; the construction of buildings, plants, 
equipment, access streets and roads, parking areas, utility 
extensions; refinancing; fees; technical assistance; and 
startup operating costs and working capital.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee includes funding for this program in the 
Rural Community Advancement Program. The budget request 
includes funding for this program in the proposed Rural 
Development Performance Partnerships Program. The House 
recommends $45,000,000, $2,500,000 less than the 1995 level.

          rural technology and cooperative development grants

Appropriations, 1995....................................      $1,750,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................         ( \1\ )
House allowance.........................................       1,500,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               1,500,000

\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships 
Program.

    This grant program is authorized by section 310(f) of the 
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, as amended by 
section 2347 of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade 
[FACT] Act of 1990. These grants are made available to public 
bodies and nonprofit organizations to fund the establishment 
and operation of centers for rural technology or cooperative 
development with their primary purpose being the improvement of 
economic conditions in rural areas. Funds are used to promote 
the development (through technological innovation, cooperative 
development, and adaptation of existing technology) and 
commercialization of new services and products that can be 
produced or provided in rural areas; new processes that can be 
utilized in the production of products in rural areas; and new 
enterprises that add value to on-farm production through 
processing or marketing. The Rural Business and Cooperative 
Development Service proposes to fund up to 75 percent of the 
project cost while requiring the applicant's contribution be at 
least 25 percent which must be cash from non-Federal sources.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For rural technology and cooperative development grants, 
the Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,500,000. This 
amount is $250,000 less than the 1995 appropriation, and the 
same as the House level. The budget request includes funding 
for this program in the proposed Rural Development Performance 
Partnerships Program.
    Of the amount provided, $1,300,000 may be provided to the 
Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas Program.

             local technical assistance and planning grants

Appropriations, 1995....................................         ( \1\ )
Budget estimate, 1996...................................         ( \2\ )
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

\1\ Reflects enacted rescission of $1,750,000.
\2\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships 
Program.

    This grant program is authorized by section 306(a)(11)(A) 
of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, as amended 
by section 2341 of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and 
Trade Act of 1990. It is designed to assist in the economic 
development of rural areas by providing technical assistance 
for business development and economic development planning. 
Grant funds may be used to identify and analyze business 
opportunities that would use local economic and human 
resources; provide technical assistance to existing or 
prospective rural entrepreneurs; establish business support 
centers and otherwise assist in the creation of new rural 
businesses; and to conduct regional, community and local 
economic development planning and coordination, and leadership 
development. RBCDS funds up to 75 percent of the project cost 
while requiring the applicant's contribution be at least 25 
percent which must be cash from non-Federal sources.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee provides no funding for local technical 
assistance and planning grants, the same as the 1995 level and 
the House recommendation. The budget request includes funding 
for this program as part of the proposed Rural Development 
Performance Partnerships Program.

           Rural Business and Cooperative Development Service

                         salaries and expenses

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Transfers from                   
                     Appropriations     loan accounts         Total     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations,                                                         
 1995.............       $95,105,000        $1,490,000       $96,595,000
Budget estimate,                                                        
 1996.............           ( \1\ )        23,394,000        23,394,000
House allowance...         9,520,000        15,331,000        24,851,000
Committee                                                               
 recommendation...         9,013,000         2,194,000        11,207,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships     
  Program.                                                              

    These funds are used to administer the loan and grant 
programs of the Rural Business and Cooperative Development 
Service including reviewing applications, making and collecting 
loans, and providing technical assistance and guidance to 
borrowers; and to assist in extending other Federal programs to 
people in rural areas.
    Under credit reform, administrative costs associated with 
loan programs are appropriated to the program accounts for the 
rural development loan fund and rural economic development 
loans. Appropriations to the ``Salaries and expenses'' account 
are for costs associated with grant programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For salaries and expenses of the Rural Business and 
Cooperative Development Service, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $11,207,000. This amount is $85,388,000 less 
than the level provided for 1995, $12,187,000 less than the 
budget request, and $13,644,000 less than the House recommended 
level.
    The Committee is aware of proposed reductions in direct 
commodity assistance programs. The Committee recognizes that 
reductions in these programs would increase the need to 
maintain and strengthen assistance to farmers to join together 
in cooperative efforts carried out by the Rural Business and 
Cooperative Development Service's Cooperative Services Program. 
The Committee expects the Department to ensure that necessary 
resources are allocated for this purpose.

                        Rural Utilities Service

    The Rural Utilities Service [RUS] was established under the 
Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (Public 
Law 103-354), October 13, 1994. RUS administers the electric 
and telecommunications programs of the former Rural 
Electrification Administration and the water and waste programs 
of the former Rural Development Administration.
    The mission of the RUS is to serve a leading role in 
improving the quality of life in rural America by administering 
its electric, telecommunications, and water and waste disposal 
programs in a service-oriented, forward-looking, and 
financially responsible manner. All three programs have the 
common goal of modernizing and revitalizing rural communities. 
RUS provides funding and support service for utilities serving 
rural areas. The public-private partnerships established by RUS 
and local utilities assist rural communities in modernizing 
local infrastructure and creating jobs. RUS programs are also 
characterized by the substantial amount of private investment 
which is leveraged by the public funds invested into 
infrastructure and technology, resulting in the creation of new 
sources of employment.

          rural water and waste disposal loans program account

Loan level, 1995........................................    $905,523,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................         ( \1\ )
House allowance.........................................         ( \1\ )
Committee recommendation................................         ( \2\ )

\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships 
Program.
\2\ Included in Rural Community Advancement Program.

    The water and waste program is authorized by several 
actions, including sections 306, 306A, 309A, and 310B of the 
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1921 et 
seq., as amended).
    Water and waste disposal loans.--Loans are made for water 
and waste disposal development costs. Development loans are 
made to associations, including corporations operating on a 
nonprofit basis, municipalities and similar organizations, 
generally designated as public or quasi-public agencies, that 
propose projects for the development, storage, treatment, 
purification, and distribution of domestic water or the 
collection, treatment, or disposal of waste in rural areas.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee includes funding for this program in the 
Rural Community Advancement Program. The House and budget 
request include funding for this loan program in the proposed 
Rural Development Performance Partnerships Program.

       estimated loan subsidy and administrative expenses levels

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Direct loan   Administrative
                                              subsidy        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995....................    $126,502,000  ..............
Budget estimate, 1996 \1\...............  ..............  ..............
House allowance \1\.....................  ..............  ..............
Committee recommendation \2\............  ..............  ..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships     
  Program.                                                              
\2\ Included in Rural Community Advancement Program.                    

    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated and loan guarantees committed in 1996, as well 
as for administrative expenses.

       rural electrification and telephone loans program account

    The Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 901 et 
seq.), (as amended) provides the statutory authority for the 
electric and telecommunications programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The following table reflects the Committee's recommended 
levels for rural electric and telephone loans administered by 
the Rural Utilities Service, as compared to the 1995 levels, 
the budget request, and the levels proposed by the House.
    The Committee is aware of the unique needs of Alaskan 
communities for upgrades to electric systems in numerous areas 
and for the provision of electricity in Sitka and Blue Lake. 
The Committee expects the Department to work with the State to 
ensure that maximum assistance is provided to these 
communities.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     1995 loan                         House         Committee  
                                                       level        1996 budget      allowance    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric loans:                                                                                                 
    REA 5 percent...............................    $100,000,000    $100,000,000     $90,000,000     $90,000,000
    FFB insured.................................     300,000,000     400,000,000     300,000,000     300,000,000
    Municipal-rate..............................     575,250,000     575,250,000     500,000,000     550,000,000
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, electric...........................     975,250,000   1,075,250,000     890,000,000     940,000,000
                                                 ===============================================================
Telephone loans:                                                                                                
    REA 5 percent...............................      54,534,000      75,000,000      70,000,000      70,000,000
    Treasury-rate...............................     297,000,000     300,000,000     300,000,000     300,000,000
    FFB insured.................................     120,000,000     120,000,000     120,000,000     120,000,000
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, telephone..........................     471,534,000     495,000,000     490,000,000     490,000,000
                                                 ===============================================================
      Total, rural electrification and telephone                                                                
       loans program account....................   1,446,784,000   1,570,250,000   1,380,000,000   1,430,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

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

        ESTIMATED LOAN SUBSIDY AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LEVELS       
                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Fiscal year                                          
                       1995     Fiscal year     House        Committee  
                     enacted    1996 budget   allowance   recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan subsidies:                                                         
    Direct loans:                                                       
        Electric                                                        
         (5                                                             
         percent)        9,703       23,520       21,168         21,168 
        Telephone                                                       
         (5                                                             
         percent)    \1\ 3,997       14,955       13,958         13,958 
                  ------------------------------------------------------
          Subtota                                                       
           l.....       13,700       38,475       35,126         35,126 
                  ======================================================
    Treasury-                                                           
     rate:                                                              
     Telephone...           60           60           60             60 
    Municipal-                                                          
     rate........       46,020       62,300       54,150         59,565 
    FFB loans:                                                          
     Electric,                                                          
     regular.....          450        3,360        2,520          2,520 
    Negative                                                            
     subsidy.....  ...........       -1,715  ...........  ..............
                  ------------------------------------------------------
      Total, loan                                                       
       subsidies.       60,230      102,480       91,856         97,271 
                  ======================================================
Rural                                                                   
 Electrification                                                        
 and Telephone                                                          
 Loan Program                                                           
 administrative                                                         
 expenses........       29,982       34,385       29,982         32,183 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects enacted rescission of $1,500,000.                          

        rural telecommunication partnership loan program account

                                                    Estimated loan level

Appropriations, 1995....................................................
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     $15,000,000
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

    The rural telecommunication partnership loans program is a 
new program proposed for fiscal year 1996 under the provisions 
of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990. 
These loans will enhance the business environment by providing 
facilities not normally available in rural areas but needed to 
compete in the global business environment. These loans will 
improve job opportunities in rural areas and enhance public 
safety and provide efficient local government services to rural 
residents and businesses. Loans will be made at low-interest 
rates and at market rates to businesses, local governments, or 
public agencies in rural areas to fund facilities in which the 
loan recipients share telecommunications terminal equipment, 
computers, computer software, and computer hardware. This 
program is proposed to improve telecommunication services in 
rural areas and provide access to advanced telecommunication 
services and computer networks to improve job opportunities and 
the business environment in rural areas.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the rural telecommunications partnership loans program, 
the Committee recommends no funding. This is $15,000,000 below 
the budget request and the same as the House recommendation. 
The program was not funded for fiscal year 1995.

       estimated loan subsidy and administrative expenses levels

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Direct loan   Administrative
                                              subsidy        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995....................  ..............  ..............
Budget estimates, 1996..................        $594,000      $1,110,000
House allowance.........................  ..............  ..............
Committee recommendation................  ..............  ..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
loans obligated in 1996, as well as for administrative 
expenses.

                  rural telephone bank program account

Loan levels, 1995.......................................    $175,000,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................................
House allowance.........................................     175,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                             175,000,000

    The Rural Telephone Bank [RTB] is required by law to begin 
privatization (repurchase of federally owned stock) in fiscal 
year 1996. RTB borrowers are able to borrow at private market 
rates and no longer require Federal assistance.
    The Rural Telephone Bank is managed by a 13-member board of 
directors. The Administrator of RUS serves as Governor of the 
Bank until conversion to private ownership, control, and 
operation. This will take place when 51 percent of the class A 
stock issued to the United States and outstanding at any time 
after September 30, 1995, has been fully redeemed and retired. 
Activities of the Bank are carried out by RUS employees and the 
Office of the General Counsel of the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For Rural Telephone Bank loans, the Committee recommends 
$175,000,000, the same as the 1995 level and the House 
recommendation. The budget does not request funds for Rural 
Telephone Bank loans. The administration proposes to privatize 
the Bank in fiscal year 1996.

       estimated loan subsidy and administrative expenses levels

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Administrative
                                           Loan subsidy      expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995....................        $770,000      $8,794,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................  ..............  ..............
House allowance.........................         770,000       3,541,000
Committee recommendation................       5,023,000       6,167,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Rural Telephone Bank loans, the Committee recommends 
$5,023,000 for loan subsidy costs under credit reform. This 
amount is $4,253,000 more than the 1995 level, $5,023,000 more 
than the budget estimate, and $4,253,000 more than the House 
level.

            distance learning and medical link grant program

Appropriations, 1995....................................      $7,500,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      15,000,000
House allowance.........................................       7,500,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               7,500,000

    The distance learning and medical link program was 
established by the Rural Economic Development Act of 1990 (104 
Stat. 4106, 7 U.S.C. 950a et seq.). This program is authorized 
in the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 
to provide incentives to improve the quality of phone services, 
to provide access to advanced telecommunications services and 
computer networks, and to improve rural opportunities.
    This program provides the facilities and equipment to link 
rural education and medical facilities with more urban centers 
and other facilities providing rural residents access to better 
health care through technology and increasing educational 
opportunities for rural students.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For distance learning and medical link grants, the 
Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,500,000. This 
amount is $7,500,000 less than the budget request, and the same 
as the House and the 1995 levels.
    The Committee is aware of and encourages the Department to 
give consideration to a distance learning and medical link 
grant application from Louisiana State University and the 
Louisiana Governor's Office of Rural Development; Maui 
Community College, HI; and the North Hawaii Community Hospital.

                 rural water and waste disposal grants

Appropriations, 1995....................................    $500,000,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................         ( \1\ )
House allowance.........................................         ( \1\ )
Committee recommendation................................         ( \2\ )

\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships 
Program.
\2\ Included in Rural Community Advancement Program.

    Water and waste disposal grants.--Grants are provided for 
water and waste disposal development costs. Development grants 
are made to associations, including corporations operating on a 
nonprofit basis, municipalities and similar organizations, 
generally designated as public or quasi-public agencies, that 
propose projects for development, storage, treatment, 
purification, and distribution of domestic water or the 
collection, treatment, or disposal of waste in rural areas. 
Such grants may not exceed 75 percent of the development cost 
of the projects and can supplement other funds borrowed or 
furnished by applicants to pay development costs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee includes funding for this program in the 
Rural Community Advancement Program. The budget request and 
House include funding for this program in the proposed Rural 
Development Performance Partnerships Program. Funding of 
$500,000,000 is available for 1995.

                     solid waste management grants

Appropriations, 1995....................................      $2,995,000
Budget estimates, 1996..................................         ( \1\ )
House allowance.........................................         ( \1\ )
Committee recommendation................................         ( \2\ )

\1\ Included in proposed Rural Development Performance Partnerships 
Program.
\2\ Included in Rural Community Advancement Program.

    This grant program is authorized under section 310B(b)(2) 
of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, as amended. 
Grants are made to public bodies and private nonprofit 
organizations to provide technical assistance to local and 
regional governments for the purpose of reducing or eliminating 
pollution of water resources and for improving the planning of 
management of solid waste disposal facilities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee includes funding for this program in the 
Rural Community Advancement Program. The budget request and the 
House include funding for this program in the proposed Rural 
Development Performance Partnerships Program. Funding of 
$2,995,000 is available for 1995.

           rural development performance partnerships program

Appropriations, 1995....................................................
Budget estimate, 1996...................................  $1,049,974,000
House allowance.........................................     435,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

    On May 2, 1995, the administration submitted amendments to 
its fiscal year 1996 budget request to create a Rural 
Development Performance Partnerships Program. This new program 
would consolidate funding for 14 existing rural development 
programs and place the ultimate decision for allocation of 
funding among these programs with State directors.
    The following table illustrates the revisions the May 22, 
1995, budget amendments make to the requests contained in the 
President's February 1995 budget submission.

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Fiscal year 1996       
                                         -------------------------------
                                             Original                   
                                              request     Amendedrequest
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural utilities service:                                                
    Solid waste management grants.......           3,000  ..............
    Rural water and waste disposal                                      
     grants.............................         590,000  ..............
    Rural water and waste disposal loans         218,218  ..............
Rural housing and community development                                 
 service:                                                               
    Rental assistance program...........         587,000         571,483
    Rural community fire protection                                     
     grants.............................           3,400  ..............
    Rural community facility loans                                      
     program account....................          59,587  ..............
    Rural housing insurance fund program                                
     account............................         806,367         779,022
Rural Business and Cooperative                                          
 Development Service:                                                   
    Salaries and expenses...............           9,589  ..............
    Rural technology and cooperative                                    
     development grants.................           3,800  ..............
    Local technical assistance and                                      
     planning grants....................           2,500  ..............
    Rural business enterprise grants....          48,000  ..............
    Rural business and industry loans                                   
     program account....................          30,072  ..............
    Rural development loan fund program                                 
     account............................          56,646  ..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       committee recommendations

    The Committee recommends no funding for the proposed Rural 
Development Performance Partnerships Program. This is 
$1,049,974,000 less than the budget estimate and $435,000,000 
less than the House recommended amount. The House proposes the 
consolidation of funding for the rural water and waste disposal 
loans, rural water and waste disposal grants, solid waste 
management grants, and associated administrative expenses under 
this heading.

                        Rural Utilities Service

                         salaries and expenses

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Transfers from                
                          Appropriations   loan accounts       Total    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995....  ..............     $38,776,000     $38,776,000
Budget estimates, 1996..     $19,627,000      53,603,000      73,230,000
House allowance.........      19,211,000      46,464,000      65,675,000
Committee recommendation      18,449,000      38,668,000      57,117,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These funds are used to administer the loan and grant 
programs of the Rural Utilities Service, including reviewing 
applications, making and collecting loans, and providing 
technical assistance and guidance to borrowers; and to assist 
in extending other Federal programs to people in rural areas.
    Under credit reform, administrative costs associated with 
loan programs are appropriated to the program accounts for 
rural electrification and telepone loans and the rural 
telephone bank. Appropriations to the ``Salaries and expenses'' 
account are for costs associated with grant programs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For salaries and expenses of the Rural Utilities Service, 
the Committee recommends an appropriation of $57,117,000. This 
amount is $18,341,000 more than the 1995 level, $16,113,000 
less than the budget request, and $8,558,000 less than the 
House recommended level.
                    TITLE IV--DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS

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

Appropriations, 1995....................................        $540,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     \1\ 553,000
House allowance.........................................         440,000
Committee recommendation................................         540,000

\1\ The 1996 budget proposed that this office be funded in a single 
account under the Office of the Secretary.

    The Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and 
Consumer Services provides direction and coordination in 
carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to 
the Department's food and consumer activities. The Office has 
oversight and management responsibilities for the Food and 
Consumer Service.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition 
and Consumer Services, the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $540,000. This amount is the same as the 1995 
level, $13,000 less than the budget request, and $100,000 more 
than the House-recommended level.

                       Food and Consumer Service

    The Food and Nutrition Service was established August 8, 
1969, by Secretary's Memorandum No. 1659 and supplement 1 
pursuant to the authority contained in 5 U.S.C. 301 and the 
Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953. The Agency was renamed the 
Food and Consumer Service [FCS] by the Department of 
Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6901). It 
represents an organizational effort to eliminate hunger and 
malnutrition in this country. Food assistance programs provide 
access to a nutritionally adequate diet for families and 
persons with low incomes, and encourage better eating patterns 
among the Nation's children. These programs include:
    Child nutrition programs.--The national school lunch and 
school breakfast, summer food service, and child and adult care 
food programs provide funding to the States, Puerto Rico, the 
Virgin Islands, and Guam for use in serving nutritious lunches 
and breakfasts to children attending schools of high school 
grades and under, to children of preschool age in child care 
centers, and to children in other institutions in order to 
improve the health and well-being of the Nation's children, and 
broaden the markets for agricultural food commodities. Through 
the special milk program, assistance is provided to the States 
for making reimbursement payments to eligible schools and child 
care institutions which institute or expand milk service in 
order to increase the consumption of fluid milk by children. 
Funds for this program are provided by direct appropriation and 
transfer from section 32.
    Food Stamp Program.--This program is aimed at making more 
effective use of the Nation's food supply and at improving 
nutritional standards of needy persons and families. Assistance 
is provided to eligible households to enable them to obtain a 
better diet by increasing their food purchasing capability, 
usually by furnishing benefits in the form of food stamps. The 
program also includes nutrition assistance to Puerto Rico. The 
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (Public Law 97-35) 
authorizes a block grant for nutrition assistance to Puerto 
Rico which gives the Commonwealth broad flexibility in 
establishing a food assistance program that is specifically 
tailored to the needs of its low-income households. Funds for 
this program are provided by direct appropriation.
    Special supplemental food program for women, infants, and 
children [WIC].--This program safeguards the health of 
pregnant, post partum, and breast-feeding women; infants; and 
children up to age 5 who are at nutritional risk because of 
inadequate nutrition and inadequate income by providing 
supplemental foods. The delivery of supplemental foods may be 
done through health clinics, vouchers redeemable at retail food 
stores, or other approved methods which a cooperating State 
health agency may select. Funds for this program are provided 
by direct appropriation.
    Commodity supplemental food program [CSFP].--This program 
provides supplemental foods to infants and children up to age 
6, and to pregnant, post partum, and breast-feeding women with 
low incomes, and who reside in approved project areas. In 
addition, this program operates commodity distribution projects 
directed at low-income elderly persons as authorized by the 
FACT Act, Public Law 101-624. Funds for this program are 
provided by direct appropriation.
    Food donations programs for selected groups.--Nutritious 
agricultural commodities are provided to low-income persons 
living on or near Indian reservations who choose not to 
participate in the food stamp program and to residents of the 
Pacific Territory of Palau and Federated States of Micronesia 
and the Marshall Islands. Participants receive information 
about nutrition, proper storage, sanitary food preparation 
methods and suggestions for using donated foods. Cash 
assistance is provided to distributing agencies to assist them 
in meeting administrative expenses incurred. Commodities, or 
cash in lieu of commodities, are provided to assist nutrition 
programs for the elderly. In addition, commodities will be 
provided to soup kitchens and food banks in fiscal year 1996. 
Funds for this program are provided by direct appropriation.
    The emergency food assistance program [TEFAP].--This 
program provides commodities and grant funds to State agencies 
to assist in the cost of storage and distribution of donated 
commodities. Under this program, assistance may be provided 
through the distribution of commodities to charitable 
institutions, food banks, hunger centers, soup kitchens, and 
similar nonprofit agencies providing nutrition assistance to 
relieve situations of emergency and distress. Funds for this 
program are provided by direct appropriation.
    Food program administration.--All salaries and Federal 
operating expenses of the Food and Consumer Service are funded 
from this account. As of September 30, 1994, there were 1,790 
full-time permanent and 68 part-time and temporary employees in 
the Agency. FCS's headquarters staff, which is located in 
Alexandria VA, totals 607, and 1,251 FCS employees are located 
in the field. There are 7 regional offices employing 844 
employees, and the balance of the Agency is located in 6 food 
stamp compliance offices, 1 computer support center in 
Minneapolis, MN, 5 administrative review offices, and 84 field 
offices. Funds for this program are provided by direct 
appropriation.

                        child nutrition programs

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Section 32                     
                      Appropriation       transfers           Total     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations,                                                         
 1995.............    $2,202,274,000    $5,249,077,000  \1\ $7,451,351,0
                                                                      00
Budget estimate,                                                        
 1996.............     2,399,942,000     5,520,492,000     7,920,434,000
House allowance...     2,354,566,000     5,597,858,000     7,952,424,000
Committee                                                               
 recommendation...     2,354,752,000     5,597,858,000     7,952,610,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Appropriations of $7,451,351,000 have not been adjusted to reflect  
  activities previously funded through the Special Milk Program         
  ($18,089,000) and transfers of $12,123,000 to be funded by permanent  
  appropriations pursuant to Public Law 103-448; $28,213,000 to be      
  funded in nutrition initiatives for 1996; and $11,259,000 to be funded
  in food program administration for 1996.                              

    The child nutrition programs, authorized by the National 
School Lunch Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, provide 
Federal assistance to State agencies in the form of cash and 
commodities for use in preparing and serving nutritious meals 
to children while they are attending school, residing in 
service institutions, or participating in other organized 
activities away from home. The purpose of this program is to 
help maintain the health and proper physical development of 
America's children. Milk is provided to children either free or 
at a low cost depending on their family income level. FCS 
provides cash subsidies to States administering the programs; 
and directly administers the program in the States which choose 
not to do so. Grants are also made for nutritional training and 
surveys and for State administrative expenses. Under current 
law, most of these payments are made on the basis of 
reimbursement rates established by law and applied to lunches 
and breakfasts actually served by the States. The reimbursement 
rates are adjusted annually to reflect changes in the Consumer 
Price Index for food away from home.
    The Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 1989, 
Public Law 101-147, contains a number of child nutrition 
provisions. These include:
    Summer Food Service Program [SFSP].--Reauthorizes and 
expands SFSP to private, nonprofit organizations under certain 
conditions.
    School Breakfast Program [SBP].--Provides startup grants 
for programs serving low-income children.
    Child and Adult Care Food Program [CACFP].--Provides funds 
for demonstration projects to expand services to homeless 
children and family day care homes in low-income areas.
    National School Lunch Program [NSLP].--(1) Mandates a 
unified system for compliance and accountability to integrate 
Federal and State efforts and provide for increased Federal 
monitoring of SFSP operations; and (2) authorizes the Food 
Service Management Institute to improve school food service 
operations.
    Nutrition education and training [NET].--Requires 
demonstration projects and studies to examine a number of 
program issues. This information aids in making informed 
decisions and improving program operations. Public Law 95-166 
institutes a program of grants to the States for nutrition 
education in schools.
    A description of child nutrition programs follows:
    1. Cash payments to States.--The programs are operated 
under an agreement entered into by the State agencies and the 
Department. Funds are made available under letters of credit to 
State agencies for use in reimbursing participating schools and 
other institutions. Sponsors make application to the State 
agencies, and if approved, are reimbursed on a per-meal basis 
in accordance with the terms of their agreements and rates 
prescribed by law. The reimbursement rates are adjusted 
annually to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index for 
food away from home.
          (a) School Lunch Program.--Assistance is provided to 
        the States for the service of lunches to all school 
        children, regardless of family income. States must 
        match some of the Federal cash grant. In fiscal year 
        1996, the School Lunch Program will provide assistance 
        for serving an estimated 4.3 billion school lunches 
        including 1.9 billion for children from upper-income 
        families and 2.4 billion for children from lower and 
        low-income families. An estimated 25.8 million children 
        are expected to participate in the program daily during 
        the school year.
          (b) Special assistance for free and reduced-price 
        lunches.--Additional assistance is provided to the 
        States for serving lunches free or at a reduced price 
        to needy children. In fiscal year 1996, under current 
        law, the program will provide assistance for about 2.4 
        billion lunches, of which 2.1 billion will be served 
        free of charge and 0.3 billion at reduced price. Over 
        14 million needy children will participate in the 
        program on an average schoolday during the year.
          (c) School Breakfast Program.--Federal reimbursement 
        to the States is based on the number of breakfasts 
        served free, at a reduced price, or at the general rate 
        for those served to nonneedy children. Certain schools 
        are designated in severe need because, in the second 
        preceding year, they served at least 40 percent of 
        their lunches at free or reduced prices and because the 
        regular breakfast reimbursement is insufficient to 
        cover cost, receive higher rates of reimbursement in 
        both the free and reduced-price categories. In fiscal 
        year 1996, the program will serve an estimated 1.2 
        billion breakfasts to a daily average of 6.9 million 
        children.
          (d) State administrative expenses.--The funds may be 
        used for State employee salaries, benefits, support 
        services, and office equipment. Public Law 95-627 made 
        the State administrative expenses grant equal to 1.5 
        percent of certain Federal payments in the second 
        previous year. In fiscal year 1996, $100,300,000 will 
        be allocated among the States to fund ongoing State 
        administrative expenses and to improve the management 
        of various nutrition programs.
          (e) Summer Food Service Program.--Meals served free 
        to children in low-income neighborhoods during the 
        summer months are supported on a performance basis by 
        Federal cash subsidies to State agencies. Funds are 
        also provided for related State and local 
        administrative expenses. During the summer of 1996, 
        approximately 134.7 million meals will be served.
          (f) Child and Adult Care Food Program.--Preschool 
        children receive year-round food assistance in 
        nonprofit child care centers and family and group day 
        care homes under this program. Public Law 97-35 permits 
        profitmaking child care centers receiving compensation 
        under title XX of the Social Security Act to 
        participate in the program if 25 percent of the 
        children served are title XX participants. Certain 
        adult day care centers are also eligible for 
        participation in this program, providing subsidized 
        meals to nonimpaired individuals age 60 years or older. 
        The Child and Adult Care Food Program reimburses State 
        agencies at varying rates for breakfasts, lunches, 
        suppers, and meal supplements and for program-related 
        State audit expenses. In fiscal year 1996, 
        approximately 1.7 billion meals will be served.
    2. Commodity procurement.--Commodities are purchased for 
distribution to the school lunch, child care food, and summer 
food service programs. The minimum commodity support rate for 
all school lunch and child care center lunches and suppers 
served is mandated by law and adjusted annually on July 1 to 
reflect changes in the producer price index for food used in 
schools and institutions. The commodities purchased with these 
funds are supplemented by commodities purchased with section 32 
funds.
    3. Nutrition studies and education.--
          (a) Nutrition education and training [NET].--This 
        program provides funds to State agencies for the 
        development of comprehensive nutrition education and 
        information programs for children participating in or 
        eligible for school lunch and related child nutrition 
        programs.
          (b) Food Service Management Institute [FSMI].--The 
        Food Service Management Institute provides instruction 
        for educators and school food service personnel in 
        nutrition and food service management.
    4. Special milk.--In fiscal year 1996 approximately 162 
million half-pints will be served in the Special Milk Program. 
These include about 152 million half-pints served to children 
whose family income is above 130 percent of poverty. During 
fiscal year 1996, the average full cost reimbursement for milk 
served to needy children is expected to be 14.7 cents for each 
half-pint. Milk served to nonneedy children is expected to be 
reimbursed at 11.3 cents for each half-pint.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the child nutrition programs, the Committee recommends 
an appropriation of $2,354,752,000, plus transfers from section 
32 of $5,597,858,000, for a total program of $7,952,610,000. 
This amount is $501,259,000 more than the 1995 program level, 
$186,000 more than the House level, and $32,176,000 more than 
the budget request.
    The Committee's recommendation provides for the following 
annual rates for the child nutrition programs.

                                          TOTAL OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY                                          
                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       House         Committee  
            Child Nutrition Programs               1995 estimate    1996 budget      allowance    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
School Lunch Program............................       4,260,302       4,433,690       4,433,690       4,433,690
School Breakfast Program........................       1,053,786       1,160,454       1,160,454       1,160,454
State administrative expenses...................          92,196         100,308         101,607         100,308
Summer Food Service Program.....................         256,456         280,303         280,303         280,303
Child and Adult Care Food Program...............       1,481,349       1,657,493       1,657,493       1,657,493
Special Milk Program............................         ( \1\ )          18,652          18,652          18,652
Commodity procurement...........................         263,077         269,534         275,199         269,534
Nutrition studies and surveys...................           3,663         ( \2\ )           4,162           4,162
Nutrition education and training................          10,270         ( \3\ )          10,000         ( \3\ )
Coordinated review system.......................           3,849         ( \4\ )           3,964           3,964
Food Service Management Institute...............           1,853         ( \3\ )           1,900         ( \3\ )
School meals initiative.........................          20,350         ( \2\ )           5,000          20,350
Kentucky/Iowa demonstration.....................           3,700         ( \2\ )  ..............           3,700
Disabled child grants...........................             500  ..............  ..............  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................       7,451,351       7,920,434       7,952,424       7,952,610
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the Special Milk Program, $18,089,000 was appropriated under a separate heading in 1995.                
\2\ Funds for this activity are requested under the heading, ``Nutrition Initiatives'' The total request        
  includes $4,162,000 for nutrition studies and surveys, $25,600,000 for the school meals initiative, and       
  $3,700,000 to continue the Kentucky/Iowa demonstration.                                                       
\3\ Funds provided by Public Law 103-448, Healthy Meals for Healthy Americans Act of 1994, for 1996 are         
  $10,000,000 for nutrition education and training and $2,000,000 for the Food Service Management Institute.    
\4\ Total funding of $3,964,000 for this activity is requested under the heading, ``Food Program                
  Administration.''                                                                                             

    The Committee continues the fiscal year 1995 level of 
funding for the school meals initiative. The Committee directs 
that these funds be used to provide training, education, and 
technical assistance to school food service personnel; and food 
service training grants to the States.
    The Food Service Management Institute [FSMI], established 
by the Congress in 1990 to conduct activities to improve the 
quality and operation of child nutrition programs, has valuable 
expertise to enhance the healthy school meals initiative. 
Recognizing this, the Healthy Meals for Healthy Americans Act 
of 1994 (Public Law 103-448) requires the Department to award 
funds to the FSMI for dietary guidelines purposes through 
noncompetitive cooperative agreements. The Committee urges the 
Department to act on these cooperative agreements on a timely 
basis and to provide funds, as directed, to fully utilize the 
Institute to conduct applied research, and to provide technical 
assistance, training, and information to schools to carry out 
the healthy school meals initiative.
    The Committee requests that the Secretary of Agriculture 
review and establish a framework for determining responsiveness 
of the Department's food guidance to the wide range of new food 
products and technologies emerging in the marketplace. The 
Committee seeks to ensure that the departmental decisions about 
the dietary contribution of these products reflect a fair 
assessment of their overall contribution to a healthy diet. In 
particular, the Committee is interested in how products derived 
from new technologies, such as fruit leather, are credited in 
FCS food assistance and nutrition programs. The Committee 
recommends that the Department identify and review the criteria 
used to determine the dietary contribution of these products in 
light of their expansion in the marketplace. The Committee 
urges that the Department act to ensure that the principles 
governing such criteria are scientifically sound, and applied 
consistently across food and nutrition programs and materials. 
Products like fruit leather would thus be evaluated based on 
their dietary contribution as 100 percent fruit and would be 
credited as fruit concentrates.

special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children 
                                 [wic]

Appropriations, 1995....................................  $3,470,000,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................   3,820,000,000
House allowance.........................................   3,729,807,000

Committee recommendation

                                                           3,729,807,000

    The special supplemental nutrition program for women, 
infants, and children [WIC] is authorized by section 17 of the 
Child Nutrition Act of 1966. Its purpose is to safeguard the 
health of pregnant, breast-feeding and post partum women and 
infants, and children up to age 5 who are at nutritional risk 
because of inadequate nutrition and inadequate income. The 
budget estimate assumes an average monthly participation of 7.4 
million participants at an average food cost of $31.93 per 
person per month in fiscal year 1996.
    The WIC program food packages are designed to provide foods 
which studies have demonstrated are lacking in the diets of the 
WIC program target population. The authorized supplemental 
foods are iron-fortified breakfast cereal, fruit or vegetable 
juice which contains vitamin C, dry beans and peas, and peanut 
butter.
    There are three general types of delivery systems for WIC 
foods: (1) retail purchase in which participants obtain 
supplemental foods through retail stores; (2) home delivery 
systems in which food is delivered to the participant's home; 
and (3) direct distribution systems in which participants pick 
up food from a distribution outlet. The food is free of charge 
to all participants.
    The Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 1989, 
Public Law 101-147, reauthorized and added several provisions 
to the program. For example, the act requires State agencies 
with a retail food delivery system to use a competitive bidding 
system or a system with equal savings for the procurement of 
infant formula. Savings are to be used to expand program 
participation. In addition, the act permits States with an 
approved cost containment system to use first quarter funds to 
cover obligations incurred during the fourth quarter of the 
preceding fiscal year.
    Public Law 101-147 changed the administrative formula for 
State program administrative costs from 20 percent of total 
available funds to a national monthly per person administrative 
grant. In addition, Public Law 101-147 makes one-half of 1 
percent of program funds, not to exceed $5,000,000, for 
evaluation of program performance. These evaluations are to be 
determined by the Secretary of Agriculture.
    The WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program [FMNP] is also 
funded from the WIC appropriation. FMNP is designed to 
accomplish two major goals: (1) to improve the diets of WIC (or 
WIC-eligible) participants by providing them with coupons to 
purchase fresh, nutritious, unprepared food, such as fruits and 
vegetables, from farmers markets; and (2) to increase the 
awareness and use of farmers' markets by low-income households. 
Although directly related to the WIC Program, about one-half of 
the current FMNP operations are administered by State 
departments of agriculture rather than the State WIC agencies.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, 
Infants, and Children [WIC], the Committee recommends an 
appropriation of $3,729,807,000. This amount is $259,807,000 
more than the 1995 appropriation, $90,193,000 less than the 
budget request, and the same as the House-recommended level.
    The Committee concurs in the House recommendation that this 
appropriation be supplemented by shifting $20,000,000 in 
nutrition services and administrative costs to food benefits, 
and by transferring $4,000,000 in supervisory and technical 
assistance program unobligated balances to this appropriation. 
In addition, it allows up to $6,750,000 to be available for the 
farmers' market nutrition program only if these funds are not 
required to maintain WIC participation levels in fiscal year 
1996.
    The Committee understands the need to maintain a recovery 
balance within the WIC program from one fiscal year to the 
next. The Committee notes that the President's budget projects 
a $100,000,000 recovery balance in fiscal year 1996. The 
Committee recommends bill language to allow the Secretary to 
transfer funds recovered from the previous fiscal year in 
excess of $100,000,000 to ensure the efficient use of limited 
resources. The Secretary should take into account the potential 
of food cost inflation and other factors to maintain an 
adequate level of carryover and to ensure funds to maintain 
end-of-year caseload and to allow program expansion. The 
Secretary is to give prior notification to the Committees on 
Appropriations if funds are transferred.

                  commodity supplemental food program

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $84,500,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      86,000,000
House allowance.........................................         ( \1\ )
Committee recommendation................................      86,000,000

\1\ Funded under proposed ``Commodity Assistance Program'' account.

    The commodity supplemental food program [CSFP] is 
authorized by section 4(a) of the Agricultural and Consumer 
Protection Act of 1973, as amended in 1981 by Public Law 97-98. 
This program provides supplemental food to infants and children 
up to age 6, and to pregnant, post partum, and breast-feeding 
women who have low incomes, and reside in approved project 
areas. In addition, this program operates commodity 
distribution projects directed at low-income elderly persons 60 
years of age or older.
    In fiscal year 1996 approximately 210,000 women, infants, 
and young children and 202,000 elderly are authorized to 
receive food packages each month. The foods are provided by the 
Department of Agriculture for distribution through State 
agencies. The authorized commodities are iron-fortified infant 
formula, rice cereal, canned juice, evaporated milk and/or 
nonfat dry milk, canned vegetables or fruits, canned meat or 
poultry, egg mix, dehydrated potatoes, farina, and peanut 
butter or dry beans. Elderly participants may receive all 
commodities except iron-fortified infant formula and rice 
cereal.
    The 1990 FACT Act, Public Law 101-624, reauthorized the 
program through fiscal year 1995. This law increases 
administrative funding from 15 to 20 percent of funds 
appropriated, discontinues administrative funding based on the 
value of donated commodities, and allows establishment of 
elderly only programs. In addition, this law requires the 
Commodity Credit Corporation to donate 4 million pounds of 
nonfat dry milk and 9 million pounds of cheese to the program 
annually, subject to availability.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Commodity Supplemental Food Program, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $86,000,000. This amount is 
$1,500,000 more than the 1995 level, the same as the budget 
request, and $86,000,000 more than the House-recommended level. 
The House includes funding for this program in the proposed 
``Commodity assistance program'' account.

                           food stamp program

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Expenses      Amount in reserve     Puerto Rico           Total      
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995 \1\............    $25,187,710,000     $2,500,000,000     $1,143,000,000    $28,830,710,000
Budget estimate, 1996...............     26,119,887,000      2,500,000,000      1,143,000,000     29,762,887,000
House allowance.....................     25,954,828,000  .................      1,143,000,000     27,097,828,000
Committee recommendation............     25,954,828,000      1,000,000,000      1,143,000,000     28,097,828,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Appropriations of $28,830,710,000 have not been adjusted to reflect transfers of $12,059,000 to be funded in
  nutrition initiatives for 1996 and $16,882,000 to be funded in food program administration for 1996.          


    The Food Stamp Program, authorized by the Food Stamp Act of 
1964, attempts to alleviate hunger and malnutrition among low-
income persons by increasing their food purchasing power. 
Eligible households receive food stamps with which they can 
purchase food through regular retail stores. They are thus 
enabled to obtain a more nutritious diet than would be possible 
without food stamp assistance. The FACT Act of 1990, Public Law 
101-624, reauthorizes the food stamp program through fiscal 
year 1995.
    The Food Stamp Program is currently in operation in all 50 
States, the District of Columbia, the Virgin Islands, and Guam. 
Participating households receive food stamps, the value of 
which is determined by household size and income. The cost of 
the stamps is paid by the Federal Government and is called the 
benefit cost. As required by law, the Food and Consumer Service 
periodically revises household stamp allotments to reflect 
changes in the cost of the thrifty food plan. The last revision 
was made on October 1, 1994.
    Since March 1975, food stamp projects have been established 
throughout the country. State social service agencies assume 
responsibility for certifying eligible households and issuing 
the stamps through suitable outlets. Authorized grocery stores 
accept the stamps as payment for food purchases and forward 
them to commercial banks for cash or credit. The stamps flow 
through the banking system to the Federal Reserve Bank for 
redemption out of a special account maintained by the U.S. 
Treasury Department. As the major alternative to the paper food 
stamp system, electronic benefit transfer is operating 
statewide in Maryland, in parts of Pennsylvania, Minnesota, 
Ohio, New Mexico, and Iowa, and is planned in other States. 
Wyoming has received approval to implement an off-line 
demonstration project for food stamps and WIC benefits in 
fiscal year 1995.
    Nutrition assistance to Puerto Rico.--The Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of 1981, Public Law 97-35, authorized a 
block grant for nutrition assistance to Puerto Rico which gives 
the commonwealth broad flexibility to establish a food 
assistance program that is specifically tailored to the needs 
of its low-income households. However, the commonwealth must 
submit its annual plan of operation to the Secretary for 
approval. The FACT Act of 1990, Public Law 101-624, enacted 
November 5, 1990, reauthorizes appropriations through fiscal 
year 1995. In addition to the provision of direct benefits to 
the needy, a portion of the grant may be used to fund up to 50 
percent of the cost of administering the program. The grant may 
also be used to fund projects to improve agriculture and food 
distribution in Puerto Rico.
    Administrative costs.--All direct and indirect 
administrative costs incurred for certification of households, 
issuance of food coupons, quality control, outreach, and fair 
hearing efforts are shared by the Federal Government and the 
States on a 50-50 basis. Under the Hunger Prevention Act of 
1988, a State agency is held liable if its error rate of 
overissuances exceeds the lowest achieved national error rate 
average plus 1 percent. Liabilities are based on the level of 
State issuance and the extent to which the State's error rate 
exceeds a tolerance level. State agencies which reduce quality 
control error rates below 6 percent receive up to a maximum 
match of 60 percent of their administrative expenses. Also, 
State agencies are paid up to 100 percent of the costs of 
administering the program on Indian reservations.
    State administration also includes State antifraud 
activities.--Under the provisions of the Food Stamp Act of 
1977, as amended by the Mickey Leland Childhood Hunger Relief 
Act of 1993, States are eligible to be reimbursed for 50 
percent of the costs of their food stamp fraud investigations 
and prosecutions.
    States are required to implement an employment and training 
program for the purpose of assisting members of households 
participating in the Food Stamp Program in gaining skills, 
training, or experience that will increase their ability to 
obtain regular employment. In fiscal year 1987, the Department 
of Agriculture implemented a new grant program to States to 
assist them in providing employment and training services.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the Food Stamp Program, the Committee recommends 
$28,097,828,000. This is $732,882,000 less than the 1995 level, 
$1,665,059,000 less than the budget request, and $1,000,000,000 
more than the House recommended level. Of the amount provided, 
$1,000,000,000 is available as a contingency reserve.
    For the Nutrition Assistance for Puerto Rico Program, the 
Committee recommends $1,143,000,000. This amount is the same as 
the budget request, the House recommendation, and the 1995 
level.
    The Committee is aware that the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico 
does not allow Food and Drug Administration approved 
productivity enhancers for food production. The Committee is 
concerned that this action artificially increases food costs to 
the Nutrition Assistance for Puerto Rico Program. The Committee 
directs the Department to determine the extent of such 
increased costs and report the findings to the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations.

              food donations programs for selected groups

Appropriations, 1995....................................    $223,154,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     269,889,000
House allowance......................................... \1\ 215,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     257,250,000

\1\ Funding for soup kitchens included under proposed ``Commodity 
Assistance Program'' account.

    The Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act of 1973, as 
amended (7 U.S.C. 612c (note)), provides for a directly funded 
food distribution program for low-income persons residing on or 
near Indian reservations who choose not to participate in the 
Food Stamp Program, and to low-income individuals in the 
Pacific Island territories. This program attempts to alleviate 
hunger and malnutrition in low-income households by providing 
nutritious agricultural commodities to eligible persons. This 
program also funds commodity support for elderly feeding 
programs under titles III and IV of the Older Americans Act of 
1965. Donated foods are used in meals served in the senior 
citizens centers or similar settings. States may elect cash in 
lieu of commodities. The FACT Act of 1990 authorizes 
$40,000,000 for the purchase and distribution of commodities to 
soup kitchens and food banks. The 1990 FACT Act further 
authorizes the distribution of soup kitchen commodities to food 
pantries through fiscal year 1995.
    Food distribution program on Indian reservations and in the 
Pacific Islands.--The Food and Agriculture Act of 1977 
authorizes the distribution of agricultural commodities to 
eligible needy persons residing on or near Indian reservations 
or in the Trust Territories of the Pacific. The act requires 
that a food distribution program be established on an Indian 
reservation if an Indian tribal organization [ITO] requests the 
program. If the ITO is capable of administering the program, it 
may do so in lieu of administration by a State agency. Public 
Law 97-98 authorizes low-income Indian households residing in 
Oklahoma and not living on a reservation to participate in the 
program.
    Cash payments are made to distributing agencies to assist 
them in meeting the administrative expenses incurred in 
operating a food distribution program. Included among these 
costs are local warehousing and transportation of commodities, 
utilities, salaries, and equipment.
    Nutrition program for the elderly.--Commodity support for 
the nutrition program for the elderly is authorized by titles 
III and VI of the Older Americans Act of 1965. The foods 
provided are used in preparing meals which are served in senior 
citizen centers and similar settings or delivered to the 
homebound elderly. These meals are the focal point of the 
nutrition projects for the elderly which have the dual 
objective of promoting better health and reducing the isolation 
of old age.
    Currently, commodities or cash in lieu of commodities are 
distributed through State agencies to the local meal sites at a 
specific rate per meal set by law. Public Law 102-375 sets the 
rate at the greater of 61 cents per meal, adjusted for 
inflation, or the amount of the appropriation divided by the 
number of meals served in the preceding fiscal year through 
fiscal year 1995. Some States elect to take all of their 
subsidy in cash and some States choose to receive a combination 
of cash and commodities. The commodities made available to the 
nutrition program for the elderly are generally the same as 
those provided to schools under the child nutrition programs.
    Commodity purchases for soup kitchens.--The FACT Act of 
1990 authorizes the purchase and distribution of $40,000,000 in 
commodities to soup kitchens and food banks through fiscal year 
1995. Commodities are distributed to the States which, in turn, 
provide them to the public and charitable institutions which 
provide food to needy homeless persons on a regular basis as an 
integral part of their activities.
    Distribution of commodities and payments for storage are 
the responsibility of State distribution agencies. States are 
responsible for requesting commodities only in quantities that 
can be efficiently used by these institutions, managing the 
distribution of commodities to local organizations, and 
ensuring that the organizations comply with all Federal program 
regulations and requirements. In addition, States are 
responsible for allocating administrative funds received under 
the Emergency Food Assistance Program [TEFAP] to TEFAP 
emergency feeding organizations, soup kitchens, and food banks.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the food donations programs for selected groups, the 
Committee recommends an appropriation of $257,250,000. This 
amount is $34,096,000 more than the 1995 appropriation, 
$12,639,000 less than the budget request, and $42,250,000 more 
than the House level. Of this amount, $66,000,000 is for the 
food distribution program on Indian reservations and the 
Pacific Islands; $151,250,000 is for the elderly feeding 
program; and $40,000,000 is for the purchase of additional 
commodities for soup kitchens and food banks.
    The Committee does not agree with the House that the 
Department should begin converting the population receiving 
assistance under the Food Distribution Program on Indian 
reservations to the Food Stamp Program only. The Committee 
notes that the average benefit cost of commodities provided 
through the food distribution program on Indian reservations 
and the Pacific Islands is much lower than that in the Food 
Stamp Program.
    For the nutrition program for the elderly, the Committee 
has included bill language establishing a maximum reimbursement 
rate per meal permitted by law as estimated by the Secretary at 
the beginning of the fiscal year within the level of available 
funds. States would receive reimbursement for all meals served, 
with downward adjustments in the rate if meal counts exceed 
estimates. If meal counts are lower than estimated, any 
obligated funds would remain available only for obligation in 
the next fiscal year.

                 the emergency food assistance program

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $65,000,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      40,000,000
House allowance.........................................         ( \1\ )
Committee recommendation................................      40,000,000

\1\ Funded under proposed ``Commodity Assistance Program'' account.

    Title II of Public Law 98-8, enacted March 3, 1983, 
authorized and appropriated funds for the costs of intrastate 
storage and transportation of CCC-donated commodities. In 
fiscal year 1995, $65,000,000 was appropriated for the purchase 
and distribution of commodities as authorized by section 104 of 
the Hunger Prevention Act of 1988.
    Funds are administered by the Food and Consumer Service 
through grants to State agencies which operate commodity 
distribution programs. Allocation of the funds to States is 
based on a formula which considers the States' unemployment 
rate and the number of persons with incomes below the poverty 
level.
    In fiscal year 1994, 48.4 million dollars' worth of surplus 
commodities were distributed to assist needy individuals. 
Donations will continue in fiscal year 1995. Precise levels 
will depend upon the availability of surplus commodities and 
requirements regarding displacement. In fiscal year 1995, 
$40,000,000 was used to help State and local authorities with 
the storage and distribution costs of providing surplus 
commodities to needy individuals.
    The 1990 FACT Act reauthorizes administrative funding 
through fiscal year 1995 and allows these funds to be used for 
local repackaging and further processing of commodities high in 
nutrient content. The law requires CCC bonus commodities to be 
distributed through TEFAP, and reauthorizes funding for the 
purchase of TEFAP commodities.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For the emergency food assistance program, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $40,000,000. This amount is 
$40,000,000 less than the House level, $25,000,000 less than 
the 1995 level, and the same as the budget request.

                      commodity assistance program

Appropriations, 1995....................................................
Budget estimate, 1996...................................................
House allowance.........................................    $168,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

    The House proposes to consolidate funding for the Commodity 
Supplemental Food Program, Soup Kitchens, and the Emergency 
Food Assistance Program into a single appropriations account.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee does not concur in the House recommendation 
to consolidate funding for Federal commodity assistance 
programs under a single account. The Committee recommends 
continued funding of these programs under separate 
appropriations accounts.

                         nutrition initiatives

Appropriations, 1995....................................         ( \1\ )
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     $49,744,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

\1\ On a comparable basis, USDA estimates 1995 appropriations would be 
$40,272,000, including transfers of $12,059,000 from the food stamp 
program and $28,213,000 from the child nutrition programs.

    This new account is proposed to fund the nutrition 
education component of all food assistance programs and support 
a Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion. It also includes 
FCS research supporting the program performance and 
effectiveness of the food stamp and child nutrition programs 
and several other initiatives.
    Research covering the food stamp and child nutrition 
programs is currently funded in the mandatory program accounts. 
In general, research funds are used to conduct evaluations, 
demonstration projects, and nationally representative studies 
which provide information to inform policy decisions and 
improve program operations.
    These funds are also used to provide assessments of program 
performance compared with their statutory goals. For example, 
these funds may be used to measure the effectiveness of 
programs in serving their eligible populations, in determining 
if meals served meet national nutrition standards, or how well 
food consumed by program participants contributes to overall 
dietary intake.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee does not concur with the budget proposal to 
create a new ``Nutrition initiatives'' account. This is the 
same as the House recommendation and $49,744,000 less than the 
budget estimate. The Committee's recommendations for the Child 
Nutrition and Food Stamp Programs continue funding to support 
authorized research activities related to those programs which 
the budget proposes to fund under this account.

                      food program administration

Appropriations, 1995....................................\1\ $106,465,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     141,360,000
House allowance.........................................     108,323,000
Committee recommendation................................     107,215,000

\1\ Appropriations of $106,465,000 have not been adjusted to reflect 
transfers of $16,882,000 from the food stamp program and $11,259,000 
from the child nutrition programs to be funded in the ``Food program 
administration'' account for 1996.

    The food program administration appropriation provides for 
all of the Federal operating expenses of the Food and Consumer 
Service, which includes the child nutrition programs; Special 
Milk Program; special supplemental food program for women, 
infants, and children [WIC]; commodity supplemental food 
program; food stamp program; nutrition assistance for Puerto 
Rico; food donations programs for selected groups; and the 
emergency food assistance program.
    The major objective of food program administration is to 
efficiently and effectively carry out the food assistance 
programs mandated by law. This is to be accomplished by the 
following: (1) giving clear and consistent guidance and 
supervision to State agencies and other cooperators; (2) 
assisting the States and other cooperators by providing 
program, managerial, financial, and other advice and expertise; 
(3) measuring, reviewing, and analyzing the progress being made 
toward achieving program objectives; and (4) carrying out 
regular staff support functions.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For food program administration, the Committee recommends 
an appropriation of $107,215,000. This amount is $1,108,000 
less than the House level, $34,145,000 less than the budget 
request, and $750,000 more than the 1995 level. The Committee's 
recommendation includes $750,000 to allow the Food and Consumer 
Service to initiate a new automated data processing information 
structure.
            TITLE V--FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS

                      Foreign Agricultural Service

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Transfers from                   
                     Appropriations     loan accounts         Total     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations,                                                         
 1995 \1\.........      $108,880,000      ($9,131,000)    ($118,011,000)
Budget estimate,                                                        
 1996.............       120,201,000       (9,318,000)     (129,519,000)
House allowance...       114,547,000       (8,973,000)     (123,520,000)
Committee                                                               
 recommendation...       115,802,000       (8,973,000)     (124,775,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pursuant to the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of     
  1994, funds appropriated for the EEO counseling function are excluded.
  These funds are included under the departmental administration        
  appropriation. On a comparable basis, USDA estimates fiscal year 1995 
  appropriations of $108,815,000.                                       


    The Foreign Agricultural Service [FAS] was established 
March 10, 1953, by Secretary's Memorandum No. 1320, supplement 
1. Public Law 83-690, approved August 28, 1954, transferred the 
agricultural attaches from the Department of State to the 
Foreign Agricultural Service.
    The Agency maintains a worldwide agricultural intelligence 
and reporting service to provide U.S. farmers and traders with 
information on world agricultural production and trade that 
they can use to adjust to changes in world demand for U.S. 
agricultural products. This is accomplished through a 
continuous program of reporting by 63 posts located throughout 
the world covering some 132 countries.
    The Foreign Agricultural Service analyzes agricultural 
information essential to the assessment of foreign supply and 
demand conditions in order to provide estimates of the current 
situation and to forecast the export potential for specific 
U.S. agricultural commodities. Published economic data about 
commodities are combined with attache reports and subjected to 
analysis through advanced econometric techniques to generate 
these estimates.
    In addition, the Service is now using advanced techniques 
for identifying, delineating, and assessing the impact of 
events which may affect the condition and expected production 
of foreign crops of economic importance to the United States. 
The crop condition activity relies heavily on computer-aided 
analysis of satellite, meteorological, agricultural, and 
related data.
    The mission of FAS overseas is to represent U.S. 
agricultural interests, to promote export of domestic farm 
products, improve world trade conditions, and report on 
agricultural production and trade in foreign countries. FAS 
staff are stationed at 75 offices around the world where they 
provide expertise in agricultural economics and marketing, as 
well as provide attache services.
    The Foreign Agricultural Service works in conjunction with 
market development cooperators, trade associations, State 
departments of agriculture and their affiliates, and U.S. sales 
teams to develop foreign markets for U.S. farm products. FAS 
sponsors overseas trade exhibits to promote U.S. agricultural 
products, provides information about foreign importers, and 
performs a wide range of market development activities.
    The Food Security Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-198) as 
amended by the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act 
of 1990 (Public Law 101-624) authorized several export 
assistance programs to counter the adverse effects of unfair 
trade practices by competitors on U.S. agricultural trade. The 
Export Enhancement Program uses CCC-owned commodities as export 
bonuses to provide export enhancements to U.S. producers. The 
Market Promotion Program [MPP] conducts both generic and brand-
identified promotional programs in conjunction with nonprofit 
agricultural associations and private firms financed through 
reimbursable CCC payments.
    These programs are supplemented by the Cooperator Program, 
a joint FAS-nonprofit private trade and producer association 
partnership program developing strategies for U.S. agriculture 
export expansion. Nonprofit private trade and producer 
associations have generated an estimated $1,320,000,000 in 
contributions to more than match the $649,000,000 contributed 
by FAS to finance overseas market promotion activities under 
the Cooperator Program. In addition, GSM credit guarantee 
programs play an integral role in the recent progress of 
American agriculture in the world marketplace.
    The Agricultural Trade Act of 1978 includes authority to 
establish up to 25 agricultural trade offices. Currently, 12 
such offices are in operation at key foreign trading centers to 
assist U.S. exporters, trade groups, and State export marketing 
officials in trade promotion.
    The Service initiates, directs, and coordinates the 
Department's formulation of trade policies and programs with 
the goal of maintaining and expanding world markets for U.S. 
agricultural products. It monitors international compliance 
with bilateral and multilateral trade agreements. It identifies 
restrictive tariff and trade practices which act as barriers to 
the import of U.S. agricultural commodities, then supports 
negotiations to remove them. It acts to counter and eliminate 
unfair trade practices by other countries that hinder U.S. 
agricultural exports to third markets.
    FAS also carries out the mission of the former Office of 
International Cooperation and Development [OICD] to promote 
U.S. agriculture and to advance the agriculture of developing 
countries as parts of a complementary global agricultural 
system capable of providing ample food and fiber for all 
people. To accomplish this mission, FAS applies USDA policies 
and U.S. agricultural perspectives in its programs of 
international agricultural cooperation and development, and in 
its work with foreign countries, international organizations, 
U.S. universities and other institutions, agencies of the U.S. 
Government, and the U.S. private sector.
    The General Sales Manager was established pursuant to 
section 5(f) of the charter of the Commodity Credit Corporation 
and 15 U.S.C. 714-714p. The funds allocated to the General 
Sales Manager are used for conducting the following programs: 
(1) CCC Export Credit Guarantee Program (GSM-102), (2) 
Intermediate Credit Guarantee Program (GSM-103), (3) Public Law 
480, (4) section 416 Overseas Donations Program, (5) Export 
Enhancement Program, (6) Market Promotion Program, and (7) 
programs authorized by the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter 
Act including barter, export sales of most CCC-owned 
commodities, export payments, and other programs as assigned to 
encourage and enhance the export of U.S. agricultural 
commodities.

                       committee recommendations

    For the Foreign Agricultural Service, the Committee 
recommends an appropriation of $115,802,000, $6,922,000 more 
than the amount available for 1995, $4,399,000 less than the 
budget request, and $1,255,000 more than the House level.
    The Committee recommendation includes the $2,000,000 
increase requested for the foreign market development program 
(cooperator program) and will expect the Department to continue 
to use unliquidated balances to maintain funding for the 
program at the fiscal year 1995 level.
    The Committee also includes the net increase requested in 
the budget for international cooperation and development, 
including an additional $250,000 for the Cochran Fellowship 
Program.
    Completion of NAFTA and GATT provides the opportunity to 
redirect available Foreign Agricultural Service resources from 
the negotiation of multilateral trade agreements to 
implementation and related issues, including the removal of 
sanitary, phytosanitary, and other nontariff trade barriers.
    Increased funding is requested for a number of FAS program 
enhancements and initiatives, including an expansion of FAS 
overseas counselor/attache posts and agricultural trade 
offices; trade shows and missions, a sanitary and phytosanitary 
team to address trade policy issues, and the Federal/State 
Marketing Improvement Program. The additional $4,650,000 
provided by the Committee is to be used to fund those budget 
proposals with the greatest potential to expand U.S. 
agricultural exports and to enhance the ability of American 
agriculture to compete effectively in the international 
marketplace.
    The Committee understands that the International 
Cooperation and Development [ICD] Program area of the Foreign 
Agricultural Service [FAS] is generally funded through 
reimbursable activities. The Committee further understands that 
the agency, the Office of International Cooperation and 
Development [OICD] before being merged with FAS, managed a 
number of activities for the emerging democracies component of 
FAS for which it was reimbursed for both the programmatic and 
administrative costs for running these activities. It is the 
Committee's intent that this operating relationship (cost 
reimbursable process) between the former OICD and FAS not be 
changed due to the merger of the two agencies, particularly 
during 1995-96.
    As a result of the diplomatic relations that have recently 
been established between the Vietnamese Government and the 
United States and the potential that exists for the export of 
United States agricultural products to this emerging market, 
the Committee directs the Secretary to take necessary actions 
under current authorities to provide technical assistance as 
deemed appropriate by the Foreign Agricultural Service. The 
Committee suggests that such technical assistance include 
greater exchanges of agricultural scientific and educational 
information, techniques, and data; agricultural marketing 
information, techniques, and data; and foster joint ventures, 
cooperative research, and the expansion of United States trade 
with Vietnam.
    Also, the Committee is aware of exchanges between Louisiana 
State University [LSU] in Baton Rouge, LA, and the Vietnamese 
Government to explore the possibilities of cooperation with 
Vietnamese universities, ministries, and other agencies in the 
areas of agricultural chemicals and their impact on water 
resources, the environment, and human health and rice hull 
power cogeneration. Within overall funding available to the 
FAS, the Committee expects the agency to assist LSU with 
technical assistance efforts, if warranted, within the 
appropriate rules and regulations for conducting such business.

                     scientific activities overseas

                       (foreign currency program)

                 limitation on administrative expenses

Obligational limitation, 1995...........................    ($1,062,000)
Budget estimate, 1996...................................................
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

    As authorized by section 104(c)(7) of the Agricultural 
Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954 (Public Law 480), 
as amended, USDA uses foreign currencies to support 
agricultural and forestry research on problems of mutual 
interest to the United States and participating foreign 
countries. Since the program's inception in 1958, over 2,400 
projects valued at approximately $180,000,000 equivalent in 
foreign currency have been negotiated in 40 countries 
worldwide.
    Research projects conducted abroad through grants 
negotiated with foreign research institutions and organizations 
were selected based on their relevance to priority U.S. 
agricultural concerns, such as preventing the incursion of 
animal diseases and exotic insects and developing plants that 
are drought tolerant, disease-resistant, and more productive. 
Cooperative research benefits U.S. agriculture by developing 
markets for U.S. agricultural products and equipment, adding to 
knowledge of our environment, and cutting the cost of valuable 
research. It also provides access to unique agricultural 
ecosystems in order to study insects, weeds, and diseases which 
have entered the United States and have caused severe losses 
due to lack of biological control.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The Committee recommends no limitation on administrative 
expenses for scientific activities overseas, the same as the 
House level and the budget request. The fiscal year 1995 
limitation is $1,062,000.

                             public law 480

                 public law 480 title i program account

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Administrative 
                      Credit level      Loan subsidy        expenses    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations,                                                         
 1995.............      $291,342,000      $236,162,000        $2,461,000
Budget estimate,                                                        
 1996.............       161,540,000       131,833,000         1,750,000
House allowance...       291,342,000       236,162,000         1,750,000
Committee                                                               
 recommendation...       291,342,000       236,162,000         1,750,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
program account. Appropriations to this account will be used to 
cover the lifetime subsidy cost associated with direct loans 
obligated in 1996 and beyond, as well as for administrative 
expenses.
    Financing sales of agricultural commodities to developing 
countries for dollars on credit terms, or for local currencies 
(including for local currencies on credit terms) for use under 
section 104; and for furnishing commodities to carry out the 
Food for Progress Act of 1985, as amended (title I).--Title I 
of the act authorizes financing of sales to developing 
countries for local currencies and for dollars on credit terms. 
Sales for dollars or local currency may be made to foreign 
governments. The legislation provides for repayment terms 
either in local currencies or U.S. dollars on credit terms of 
up to 30 years, with a grace period of up to 7 years.
    Local currencies under title I sales agreements may be used 
in carrying out activities under section 104 of the 
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, as 
amended. Activities in the recipient country for which these 
local currencies may be used include developing new markets for 
U.S. agricultural commodities, paying U.S. obligations, and 
supporting agricultural development and research.
    Title I appropriated funds may also be used under the Food 
for Progress Act of 1985, as amended, to furnish commodities on 
credit terms or on a grant basis to assist developing counties 
and countries that are emerging democracies that have a 
commitment to introduce and expand free enterprise elements in 
their agricultural economies.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    For Public Law 480, title I, the Committee recommends a 
program level of $316,342,000. This amount is the same as the 
House level, $4,000,000 less than the 1995 level, and 
$138,385,000 more than the budget request. The corresponding 
loan levels, subsidies, and administrative expenses are 
reflected in the table above.

public law 480 grant account (title i ocean freight differential, title 
                           ii and title iii)

Appropriations, 1995....................................\1\ $967,542,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................     862,120,000
House allowance.........................................     896,100,000
Committee recommendation................................     896,100,000

\1\ Reflects enacted rescission of $40,000,000 in title III.

    Ocean freight differential costs in connection with 
commodities sales financed for local currencies or U.S. dollars 
(title I).--The Commodity Credit Corporation pays ocean freight 
differential costs on shipments under this title. These costs 
are the difference between foreign flag and U.S. flag shipping 
costs.
    Commodities supplied in connection with dispositions abroad 
(title II) (7 U.S.C. 1721-1726).--Commodities are supplied 
without cost through foreign governments to combat malnutrition 
and to meet famine and other emergency requirements. 
Commodities are also supplied for nonemergencies through public 
and private agencies, including intergovernmental 
organizations. The Commodity Credit Corporation pays ocean 
freight on shipments under this title, and may also pay 
overland transportation costs to a landlocked country, as well 
as internal distribution costs in emergency situations. The 
funds appropriated for title II are made available to private 
voluntary organizations and cooperatives to assist these 
organizations in meeting administrative and related costs.
    Commodities supplied in connection with dispositions abroad 
(title III).--Commodities are supplied without cost to least 
developed countries through foreign governments for direct 
feeding, development of emergency food reserves, or may be sold 
with the proceeds of such sale used by the recipient country 
for specific economic development purposes. The Commodity 
Credit Corporation may pay ocean freight on shipments under 
this title, and may also pay overland transportation costs to a 
landlocked country, as well as internal distribution costs.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

    The following table shows the Committee's recommendations 
for the Public Law 480 grant account:

                                          PUBLIC LAW 480 GRANT ACCOUNT                                          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       House         Committee  
                                                   1995 enacted     1996 budget      allowance    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I ocean freight differential..............     $29,000,000     $16,417,000     $25,000,000     $25,000,000
Title II commodities supplied in connection with                                                                
 dispositions abroad............................     821,100,000     795,703,000     821,100,000     821,100,000
Title III commodities supplied in connection                                                                    
 with dispositions abroad.......................  \1\ 117,442,00                                                
                                                               0      50,000,000      50,000,000      50,000,000
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................     967,542,000     862,120,000     896,100,000     896,100,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects enacted rescission of $40,000,000 in title III.                                                    


    The Committee is concerned that the Agency for 
International Development [AID] is diluting the impact of the 
Farmer-to-Farmer Program by spreading limited funds too thinly 
among countries and program implementors. The Committee directs 
AID to review its fund allocation procedures to maximize the 
cost-effective uses of Farmer-to-Farmer Program resources.

                    ccc export loans program account

             (export credit programs, gsm-102 and gsm-103)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Guaranteed loan   Guaranteed loan   Administrative 
                         levels            subsidy          expenses    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations,                                                         
 1995.............    $5,700,000,000      $394,393,000        $3,381,000
Budget estimate,                                                        
 1996.............     5,700,000,000   \1\ 374,347,000         3,745,000
House allowance...     5,700,000,000       374,347,000         3,381,000
Committee                                                               
 recommendation...     5,700,000,000       374,347,000         3,381,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Amount proposed is through a permanent indefinite appropriation.    


    In 1980, CCC instituted the Export Credit Guarantee Program 
(GSM-102) under its charter authority. With this program, CCC 
guarantees, for a fee, payments due U.S. exporters under 
deferred payment sales contracts (up to 36 months) for defaults 
due to commercial as well as noncommercial risks. The risk to 
CCC extends from the date of export to the end of the deferred 
payment period covered in the export sales contract and covers 
only that portion of the payments agreed to in the assurance 
agreement. Operation of this program is based on criteria which 
will assure that it is used only where it is determined that it 
will develop new market opportunities and maintain and expand 
existing world markets for U.S. agricultural commodities. The 
program encourages U.S. financial institutions to provide 
financing to those areas where the institutions would be 
unwilling to provide financing in the absence of the CCC 
guarantees.
    In 1986, the Intermediate Export Credit Guarantee Program 
(GSM-103) was implemented by CCC under its charter authority as 
required by the Food Security Act of 1985. The program is 
similar to the Export Credit Guarantee Program (GSM-102), but 
provides for CCC guarantees to exporters for commodities sold 
on credit terms in excess of 3 years, but not more than 10 
years. The program also provides for adjusting the maximum 
amount of interest which CCC guarantees to pay under the 
payment guarantee and permits freight costs to be covered for 
breeding animals financed under the GSM-102 and GSM-103 
programs.
    The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 establishes the 
program account. The subsidy costs of the CCC export guarantee 
programs are exempt from the requirement of advance 
appropriations of budget authority according to section 
504(c)(2) of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, Public Law 
101-508. Appropriations to this account will be used for 
administrative expenses.
                       TITLE VI--RELATED AGENCIES

                Department of Health and Human Services

                      Food and Drug Administration

    The mission of the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] is to 
ensure that (1) food is safe, pure, and wholesome; (2) 
cosmetics are unadulterated; (3) human and animal drugs, 
biological products, and therapeutic devices are safe and 
effective; and (4) radiological products and use procedures do 
not result in unnecessary exposure to radiation.
    Under the foods program, FDA sets food standards; evaluates 
food additives and packaging for potential health hazards; 
conducts research to reduce food-borne disease, to determine 
specific health impacts of hazardous substances in food and to 
develop methods for detecting them in foods; maintains 
surveillance over foods through plant inspections, laboratory 
analyses, and legal action where necessary; and ensures fair 
and informative labeling and nutrient information.
    The drugs program includes the premarket review of human 
and animal drugs and biological products in order to ensure 
their safety and efficacy; research to improve the agency's 
base of scientific knowledge; and the postmarketing monitoring 
of drug experience. FDA conducts manufacturer inspections and 
sample examinations to ensure industry compliance. Included 
under this program activity is the similar regulation of animal 
devices and feeds, as well as a program to assure the safety of 
animal-derived human foods.
    The devices and radiological products program conducts 
premarket review and postmarket surveillance of medical devices 
to assure their safety and efficacy, and sets standards for the 
manufacture and use of radiological products to protect the 
public from unnecessary exposure to radiation. FDA monitors 
experience with medical devices, and conducts inspections of 
manufacturing plants and tests of radiological products to 
ensure compliance with regulations and standards; conducts 
research to improve the agency's base of scientific knowledge; 
and conducts education programs to promote safe and effective 
use of devices and radiological products.
    For these three major product-oriented programs, the agency 
utilizes a wide variety of scientific skills to deal with the 
many types of products regulated and the many scientific 
decisions FDA must make. These skills range from field 
investigators, all of whom must have education in the physical 
or biological sciences, to chemists, microbiologists, 
engineers, medical officers, and scientists from many other 
disciplines. Similarly, FDA utilizes a variety of laboratory 
facilities, both to test products for safety and to conduct the 
research necessary to evaluate health hazards and to develop 
the means to detect product hazards and prevent them.
    In addition, the National Center for Toxicological Research 
in Jefferson, AR, serves as a specialized resource for FDA's 
other program elements. This facility conducts research to 
improve the base of scientific knowledge and applied science 
which the agency uses in conducting its regulatory and consumer 
protection missions.

                         salaries and expenses

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Prescription     Mammography                                    
                               Appropriation   drug user fee       clinics      Other user fees       Total     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1995........    $819,971,000    ($79,423,000)     ($6,500,000)  ...............   ($905,894,000)
Budget estimate, 1996.......     828,999,000     (84,723,000)     (13,000,000)  \1\ ($38,740,00                 
                                                                                             0)    (965,462,000)
House allowance.............     819,971,000     (84,723,000)     (13,000,000)  ...............    (917,694,000)
Committee recommendation....     819,971,000     (84,723,000)     (13,000,000)  ...............    (917,694,000)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Collections from currently unauthorized user fees. The President's budget proposes legislation to authorize 
  new medical device and import inspection user fees.                                                           

                       committee recommendations

    For salaries and expenses, the Committee recommends 
$917,694,000. This amount is $11,800,000 more than the 1995 
amount, $47,768,000 less than the budget estimate, and the same 
as the House level. The recommendation includes $84,723,000 in 
user fees authorized by the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, and 
$13,000,000 in user fees authorized by the Mammography Quality 
Standards Act, as requested in the President's budget. The 
Committee has retained House bill language which prohibits FDA 
from developing, establishing, or operating any program of user 
fees authorized by 31 U.S.C. 9701. The Committee continues its 
view that legislative proposals to establish new user fees 
should be submitted for consideration by the appropriate 
authorizing Committees of the Congress.
    The Committee continues funding for the FDA at the fiscal 
year 1995 level. The only increases provided are for 
collections from authorized user fees. Estimated collections of 
$84,723,000 will finance 600 full-time equivalents [FTE's] in 
fiscal year 1996 to be used for the Prescription Drug Act user 
fee program, an increase of $5,300,000 and 100 FTE's above the 
fiscal year 1995 level. Mammography Quality Standards Act user 
fees collections will total an estimated $13,000,000 in fiscal 
year 1996, an increase of $6,500,000 and 35 FTE's above the 
fiscal year 1995 levels. These fee collections will be used to 
pay for the cost of mammography facility inspections.
    The Committee expects the FDA to operate within its 
resource constraints by refocusing its efforts on its core 
functions and reducing unnecessary costs.
    No funding is provided for the FDA to implement or operate 
a cosmetic hotline. The FDA should expand the existing system 
for the reporting of adverse reactions to include cosmetics, if 
necessary.
    The Orphan Drug Program is to operate at not less than the 
fiscal year 1995 level.
    The Committee continues to be concerned about the ability 
of the FDA to review and process premarket approval 
applications [PMA's] and premarket notifications (510(k)'s) for 
medical devices in a timely manner and to reduce the backlog of 
these applications. While the Committee recognizes some 
improvement in these areas, FDA review times still exceed those 
required by statute. The Committee directs that the 571 full-
time equivalent position levels allocated for product 
evaluation activities of the Center for Devices and 
Radiological Health [CDRH] be maintained in fiscal year 1996. 
Further, it strongly encourages the agency to increase 
resources for product approval from lower priority areas in 
order to make substantial progress in achieving the following 
objectives: (1) elimination of the 510(k) overdue backlog; (2) 
elimination of the PMA overdue backlog; (3) completion of final 
action on at least 95 percent of 510(k) applications within 90 
days; and (4) completion of at least 90 percent of first-cycle 
reviews for PMA's within 180 days. The Commissioner of the FDA 
is directed to make quarterly reports to the Committee 
detailing the specific measures being taken, the level of 
resources provided, and the progress FDA is making to achieve 
these objectives.
    While the Committee deletes a House bill provision 
establishing ceilings on full-time equivalent levels for 
certain offices of the FDA, it concurs with the House that 
staffing and funding for these offices should not exceed fiscal 
year 1995 levels. In the future, the Committee expects a 
detailed breakdown of funding and employment levels for the 
following FDA offices to be included in the appropriations 
justification provided to the Committee in support of the 
President's budget: the Office of the Commissioner; the Office 
of Policy; the Office of External Affairs (to include the 
Office of Health Affairs, the Office of Consumer Affairs, and 
the Office of Public Affairs); and the Office of Management and 
Systems (to include the Office of Planning and Evaluation and 
the Office of Management).
    The FDA also is directed to withhold any further action to 
eliminate or consolidate field laboratories until the Committee 
has an opportunity to review a report now being completed by 
the General Accounting Office [GAO] on the proposed action. The 
GAO study, initiated in December 1994, is reviewing FDA's field 
laboratory restructuring plan to determine: (1) the adequacy of 
the criteria used to identify laboratories for closure or 
retention; (2) the costs and savings related to the 
restructuring; and (3) how well FDA measured the mission impact 
of the proposal.
    The Committee expects the FDA to exercise the authority it 
has to establish, where appropriate, current good manufacturing 
practice requirements for animal drugs separate from the 
requirements applicable to drugs for human use.
    The Committee shares concerns raised by the House regarding 
the rule proposed by the Food and Drug Administration requiring 
food products, which contain hydrolyzed proteins and autolyzed 
yeast extracts, to be labeled ``contains glutamate''. The 
Committee understands that the FDA will be issuing a new 
proposed rule regarding this matter. In writing the new 
proposed rule, the Committee urges the FDA to consider strongly 
the potential job loss associated with this rule.

                        buildings and facilities

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $18,150,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................       8,350,000
House allowance.........................................      15,350,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               8,350,000

    In addition to Washington area laboratories which are in 
nine separate locations, there are 24 lab facilities around the 
country, including regular field laboratories and specialized 
facilities, as well as the National Center for Toxicological 
Research complex. Continued repairs, modifications, and 
improvements to FDA headquarters and field facilities must be 
made to preserve the properties, ensure employee safety, meet 
changing program requirements, and permit the agency to keep 
its laboratory methods up to date.

                       committee recommendations

    For continued repairs and improvements of FDA buildings and 
facilities, the Committee recommends $8,350,000. This amount is 
$9,800,000 less than the 1995 appropriation, the same as the 
budget request, and $7,000,000 less than the House level.

                          rental payments, fda

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $46,294,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      46,294,000
House allowance.........................................      46,294,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              46,294,000

    Annual appropriations are made to agencies of the Federal 
Government to pay the General Services Administration [GSA] 
fees for rental of space and for related services.

                       committee recommendations

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $46,294,000 
for rental payments of the Food and Drug Administration. This 
amount is the same as the budget estimate, the House amount and 
the 1995 level.

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

  payments to the farm credit system financial assistance corporation

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $57,026,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      15,453,000
House allowance.........................................      15,453,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              15,453,000

    The Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-233) 
authorized such sums as necessary to be appropriated to the 
Secretary of the Treasury for payment to the Farm Credit System 
Assistance Corporation. These payments reimburse the 
Corporation for interest expenses on U.S. guaranteed debt 
issued by the Corporation. Assistance Corporation debt proceeds 
were used to provide assistance to financially troubled system 
institutions. Beginning in fiscal 1989, Treasury will annually 
reimburse 100 percent of the Assistance Corporation interest 
expense incurred between the date of issuance of each 
obligation and the first 5-year period of such obligation. 
During each year of the second 5-year period beginning from the 
data of the issuance of each obligation, Treasury will 
reimburse an amount not to exceed 50 percent of the Assistance 
Corporation's interest expense, with system banks paying the 
balance. Thereafter all Assistance Corporation interest expense 
will be paid by system banks.

                       committee recommendations

    For interest expenses incurred by the Farm Credit System 
Financial Assistance Corporation as authorized by the Farm 
Credit Assistance Board, the Committee recommends $15,453,000, 
$41,573,000 less than the 1995 level and the same as the budget 
estimate and House level.

                          INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

                  Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Appropriations, 1995....................................     $49,144,000
Budget estimate, 1996...................................      59,711,000
House allowance.........................................      49,144,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              54,058,000

    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 purpose of the Commission is to protect and further the 
economic utility of futures markets by encouraging their 
efficiency, assuring their integrity, and protecting 
participants against manipulation, abusive trade practices, 
fraud, and deceit. The objective is to enable the markets 
better to serve their designated functions of providing a price 
discovery mechanism and providing price risk insurance. In 
properly serving these functions, the futures markets 
contribute toward better production and financial planning, 
more efficient distribution and consumption, and more 
economical marketing.
    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, four 
regional offices located in Chicago, New York, Kansas City, and 
Los Angeles; and a branch office located in Minneapolis.

                       committee recommendations

    For the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Committee 
recommends $54,058,000. The amount provided is $4,914,000 more 
than the 1995 amount and the House level, and $5,653,000 less 
than the budget request.
    The Commission requests an increase of $10,600,000 to 
enable it to carry out its substantial new responsibilities and 
authorities under The Futures Trading Act of 1992, and to keep 
pace with the dramatic changes and growth in the financial 
markets. While resource constraints prevent the Committee from 
granting the full increase requested, the Committee provides an 
additional $4,914,000 to enable the Commission to fully and 
effectively implement its statutory responsibilities; to ensure 
adequate enforcement, customer and financial protections; and 
to address changing developments in the markets.

                       Farm Credit Administration

        limitation on revolving fund for administrative expenses

Limitations, 1995.......................................   ($40,420,000)
Budget estimate, 1996...................................    (39,900,000)
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

    The Farm Credit Administration [FCA] is the independent 
agency in the executive branch of the Government responsible 
for the examination and regulation of the banks, associations, 
and other institutions of the Farm Credit System.
    Activities of the Farm Credit Administration include the 
planning and execution of examinations of Farm Credit System 
institutions and the preparation of examination reports. FCA 
also establishes standards, enforces rules and regulations, and 
approves certain actions of the institutions.
    The administration and the institutions under its 
jurisdiction now operate under authorities contained in the 
Farm Credit Act of 1971, Public Law 92-181, effective December 
10, 1971. Public Law 99-205, effective December 23, 1985, 
restructured FCA and gave the agency regulatory authorities and 
enforcement powers.
    The act provides for the farmer-owned cooperative system to 
make sound, adequate, and constructive credit available to 
farmers and ranchers and their cooperatives, rural residences, 
and associations and other entities upon which farming 
operations are dependent, and to modernize existing farm credit 
law to meet current and future rural credit needs.
    The Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 authorized the 
formation of the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation 
[FAMC] to operate a secondary market for agricultural and rural 
housing mortgages. The Farm Credit Administration, under 
section 8.11 of the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended, is 
assigned the responsibility of regulating this entity and 
assuring its safe and sound operation.
    Expenses of the Farm Credit Administration are paid by 
assessments collected from the Farm Credit System institutions 
and by assessments to the Federal Agricultural Mortgage 
Corporation.

                       committee recommendations

    The Committee recommends no limitation on administrative 
expenses of the Farm Credit Administration. This is the same as 
the House recommendation. The limitation in 1995 is $40,420,000 
and the budget requests a limitation of $39,900,000.
    The Committee has included an administrative provision in 
the bill to allow retired employees of the Farm Credit 
Administration to reenter the Federal Employees Health Benefits 
Program.
                     TITLE VII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Sections 701, 713-718, and 721 of the general provisions 
contained in the accompanying bill are essentially the same as 
those included in last year's appropriations act and continued 
in the House-passed bill.
    The Committee retains the following House bill provisions:
    Section 719 which provides that not more than 5 percent of 
class A stock of the Rural Telephone Bank may be retired in 
fiscal year 1996; and
    Section 720 which prohibits the use of funds to provide 
benefits to households if such benefits are calculated using a 
standard deduction greater than the standard deduction in 
effect for fiscal year 1995.
    The Committee amends section 712 to exempt grants awarded 
under the Small Business Innovation Development Act from the 
cap on indirect costs on research grants awarded competitively 
by the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
Service.
    The Committee strikes the following two House bill 
provisions:
    Section 722 which establishes a ceiling on the level of 
full-time equivalency positions at the fiscal year 1995 level 
for certain offices of the Food and Drug Administration; and
    Section 723 which prohibits the use of funds provided by 
the act to carry out a market promotion program which provides 
assistance to the U.S. Mink Export Development Council or any 
mink industry trade association.
    The Committee recommends the following new provisions:
    Section 724 which limits the total acreage enrollment in 
the Wetlands Reserve Program in fiscal year 1996 to 100,000;
    Section 725 which prohibits funds provided in the act from 
being used to carry out an export enhancement program in excess 
of $800,000,000 in fiscal year 1996; and
    Section 726 which eliminates the use of funds provided by 
the act to provide assistance to livestock producers if crop 
insurance protection or noninsured crop disaster assistance is 
available for the loss of feed produced on the farm under the 
Federal crop insurance program.
    Section 727 which prohibits funds made available by the act 
from being used to enroll additional acreage in the 
Conservation Reserve Program in fiscal year 1996.
    Section 728 which makes Commodity Credit Corporation funds 
available to producers for 1995 cotton crop losses due to 
insect damage. The Secretary will establish the terms and 
conditions under which these funds are disbursed.
    Section 729 which prohibits funds made available by the act 
from being used to develop compliance guidelines, implement or 
enforce a regulation promulgated by the Food Safety and 
Inspection Service on August 25, 1995, until legislation is 
enacted into law which directs the Secretary of Agriculture to 
promulgate such a regulation, or the House Committee on 
Agriculture and the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, 
and Forestry receive and approve a proposed revised regulation 
submitted by the Secretary of Agriculture.

                     Program, Project, and Activity

    During fiscal year 1996, for purposes of the Balanced 
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 
99-177) or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 
Reaffirmation Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-119), the following 
information provides the definition of the term ``program, 
project, and activity'' for departments and agencies under the 
jurisdiction of the Agriculture, Rural Development, and Related 
Agencies Subcommittee. The term ``program, project, and 
activity'' shall include the most specific level of budget 
items identified in the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food 
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations 
Act, 1996, the House and Senate Committee reports, and the 
conference report and accompanying joint explanatory statement 
of the managers of the committee of conference.
    If a sequestration order is necessary, in implementing the 
Presidential order, departments and agencies shall apply any 
percentage reduction required for fiscal year 1996 pursuant to 
the provisions of Public Law 99-177 or Public Law 100-119 to 
all items specified in the explanatory notes submitted to the 
Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate in support 
of the fiscal year 1996 budget estimates, as amended, for such 
departments and agencies, as modified by congressional action, 
and in addition:
    For the Agricultural Research Service the definition shall 
include specific research locations as identified in the 
explanatory notes and lines of research specifically identified 
in the reports of the House and Senate Appropriations 
Committees.
    For the Natural Resources Conservation Service the 
definition shall include individual flood prevention projects 
as identified in the explanatory notes and individual 
operational watershed projects as summarized in the notes.
    For the Consolidated Farm Service Agency the definition 
shall include individual, regional, State, district, and county 
offices.

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

    Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports 
accompanying general appropriations bills identify each 
recommended amendment 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.
    The following amendments recommended by the Committee 
propose an item of appropriation which lacks authorization for 
fiscal year 1996:
  --$707,000,000 for the Agricultural Research Service;
  --$418,172,000 for research and education activities of the 
        Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
        Service;
    --$171,304,000 to carry into effect the provisions of the 
            Hatch Act;
    --$20,809,000 for grants for cooperative forestry research;
    --$28,157,000 for payments to the 1890 land-grant colleges 
            and Tuskegee University;
    --$40,670,000 for special grants for agricultural research;
    --$9,769,000 for special grants for agricultural research 
            on improved pest control;
    --$99,582,000 for competitive research grants;
    --$5,551,000 for the support of animal health and disease 
            programs;
    --$500,000 for supplemental and alternative crops and 
            products;
    --$500,000 for grants for research pursuant to the Critical 
            Agricultural Materials Act of 1984 and section 1472 
            of the Food and Agriculture Act of 1977, as 
            amended;
    --$8,112,000 for sustainable agriculture research and 
            education;
    --$9,207,000 for a program of capacity building grants to 
            colleges eligible to receive funds under the act of 
            August 30, 1890, including Tuskegee University;
    --$10,686,000 for necessary expenses of research and 
            education activities;
  --$57,838,000 for Cooperative State Research, Education, and 
        Extension Service, buildings and facilities;
  --$437,131,000 for extension activities of the Cooperative 
        State Research, Education, and Extension Service;
    --$272,582,000 for payments for cooperative extension work 
            under sections 3(b) and 3(c) of the Smith-Lever 
            Act, for retirement and employees' compensation 
            costs for extension agents and for costs of penalty 
            mail for cooperative extension agents and State 
            extension directors;
    --$61,431,000 for payments for the nutrition and family 
            education program for low-income areas;
    --$2,988,000 for payments for the farm safety program;
    --$7,901,000 for payments to upgrade 1890 land-grant 
            college research, extension, and teaching 
            facilities;
    --$950,000 for payments for the rural development centers;
    --$11,234,000 for payments for a ground water quality 
            program;
    --$1,221,000 for payments for the rural telecommunications 
            program;
    --$10,000,000 for payments for youth-at-risk programs;
    --$4,265,000 for payments for a nutrition education 
            initiative;
    --$2,475,000 for a food safety program;
    --$3,341,000 for carrying out the provisions of the 
            Renewable Resources Extension Act of 1978;
    --$1,750,000 for payments for Indian reservation agents;
    --$2,750,000 for payments for rural health and safety 
            education;
    --$25,472,000 for payments for cooperative extension work 
            by the colleges receiving the benefits of the 
            second Morrill Act and Tuskegee University;
    --$10,998,000 for Federal administration and coordination, 
            including administration of the Smith-Lever Act, as 
            amended, and the act of September 29, 1977, as 
            amended, and section 1361(c) of the act of October 
            3, 1980, and to coordinate and provide program 
            leadership for the extension work of the Department 
            and the several States and insular possessions;
  --$27,000,000 for resource conservation and development;
  --$6,325,000 for the Forestry Incentives Program;
  --$3,000,000 for State mediation grants;
  --$34,053,000 for the cost of direct and guaranteed farm 
        ownership loans;
  --$111,505,000 for the cost of direct and guaranteed farm 
        operating loans;
  --$77,000,000 for the Wetlands Reserve Program;
  --$86,000,000 for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program;
  --$28,097,828,000 for the Food Stamp Program;
  --$217,250,000 for food donations programs for selected 
        groups;
  --$40,000,000 to carry out section 110 of the Hunger 
        Prevention Act of 1988; and
--$40,000,000 for the Emergency Food Assistance Program.

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

    Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, the accompanying 
bill was ordered reported from the Committee, subject to 
amendment and subject to the subcommittee allocation, by 
recorded vote of 28-0, a quorum being present.
        Yeas                          Nays
Chairman Hatfield
Mr. Stevens
Mr. Cochran
Mr. Specter
Mr. Domenici
Mr. Gramm
Mr. Bond
Mr. Gorton
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Mack
Mr. Burns
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Jeffords
Mr. Gregg
Mr. Bennett
Mr. Byrd
Mr. Inouye
Mr. Hollings
Mr. Johnston
Mr. Leahy
Mr. Bumpers
Mr. Lautenberg
Mr. Harkin
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Reid
Mr. Kerrey
Mr. Kohl
Mrs. Murray

 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.''
    The Committee recommends the following legislative 
provision regarding the administration of chapter 89 of title 
5, United States Code:

            Sec. 601. (a) For purposes of the administration of 
        chapter 89 of title 5, United States Code, any period of 
        enrollment under a health benefits plan administered by 
        the Farm Credit Administration prior to the effective 
        date of this Act shall be deemed to be a period of 
        enrollment in a health benefits plan under chapter 89 of 
        such title.
            (b)(1) An individual who, on September 30, 1995, is 
        covered by a health benefits plan administered by the 
        Farm Credit Administration may enroll in an approved 
        health benefits plan described under section 8903 or 
        8903a of title 5, United States Code--
                  (A) either as an individual or for self and 
                family, if such individual is an employee, 
                annuitant, or former spouse as defined under 
                section 8901 of such title; and
                  (B) for coverage effective on and after 
                September 30, 1995.
            (2) An individual who, on September 30, 1995, is 
        entitled to continued coverage under a health benefits 
        plan administered by the Farm Credit Administration--
                  (A) shall be deemed to be entitled to 
                continued coverage under section 8905a of title 
                5, United States Code, for the same period that 
                would have been permitted under the plan 
                administered by the Farm Credit Administration; 
                and
                  (B) may enroll in an approved health benefits 
                plan described under section 8903 or 8903a of 
                such title in accordance with section 8905A of 
                such title for coverage effective on and after 
                September 30, 1995.
            (3) An individual who, on September 30, 1995, is 
        covered as an unmarried dependent child under a health 
        benefits plan administered by the Farm Credit 
        Administration and who is not a member of family as 
        defined under section 8901(5) of title 5, United States 
        Code--
                  (A) shall be deemed to be entitled to 
                continued coverage under section 8905a of such 
                title as though the individual had, on September 
                30, 1995, ceased to meet the requirements for 
                being considered an unmarried dependent child 
                under chapter 89 of such title; and
                  (B) may enroll in an approved health benefits 
                plan described under section 8903 or 8903a of 
                such title in accordance with section 8905a for 
                continued coverage on and after September 30, 
                1995.
            (c) The Farm Credit Administration shall transfer to 
        the Federal Employees Health Benefits Fund established 
        under section 8909 of title 5, United States Code, 
        amounts determined by the Director of the Office of 
        Personnel Management, after consultation with the Farm 
        Credit Administration, to be necessary to reimburse the 
        Fund for the cost of providing benefits under this 
        section not otherwise paid for by the individual's 
        covered by this section. The amount so transferred shall 
        be held in the Fund and used by the Office in addition 
        to the amounts available under section 8906(g)(1) of 
        such title.
            (d) The Office of Personnel Management--
                  (1) shall administer the provisions of this 
                section to provide for--
                          (A) a period of notice and open 
                        enrollment for individuals affected by 
                        this section; and
                          (B) no lapse of health coverage for 
                        individuals who enroll in a health 
                        benefits plan under chapter 89 of title 
                        5, United States Code, in accordance 
                        with this section; and
                  (2) may prescribe regulations to implement 
                this section.

                 COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996                
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                        Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+ or -)  
                      Item                        1995appropriation    Budget estimate     House allowance   Committeerecommendation -----------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                       1995appropriation    Budget estimate     House allowance 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                                                                
         TITLE I--AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS                                                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                                                                                
     Production, Processing, and Marketing                                                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Office of the Secretary........................         $2,770,000          $2,886,000         $10,227,000            $12,801,000          +$10,031,000         +$9,915,000         +$2,574,000 
Executive Operations:                                                                                                                                                                           
    Chief Economist............................  ..................          4,240,000           3,948,000              3,814,000            +3,814,000            -426,000            -134,000 
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for                                                                                                                                                       
     Economics.................................            540,000   ..................  ..................  .......................           -540,000   ..................  ..................
    World Agricultural Outlook Board...........          2,498,000   ..................  ..................  .......................         -2,498,000   ..................  ..................
    National Appeals Division..................  ..................         12,166,000          11,846,000             11,846,000           +11,846,000            -320,000   ..................
    Office of Budget and Program Analysis......          5,795,000           5,899,000           5,899,000              5,899,000              +104,000   ..................  ..................
    Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business                                                                                                                                                  
     Utilization...............................  ..................            724,000   ..................  .......................  ..................           -724,000   ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total, Executive Operations............          8,833,000          23,029,000          21,693,000             21,559,000           +12,726,000          -1,470,000            -134,000 
Chief Financial Officer........................            580,000           4,952,000           4,133,000              4,133,000            +3,553,000            -819,000   ..................
Office of the Assistant Secretary for                                                                                                                                                           
 Administration................................            596,000             616,000             596,000                596,000     ..................            -20,000   ..................
Agriculture buildings and facilities (USDA)....        135,193,000         135,774,000         135,774,000            135,774,000              +581,000   ..................  ..................
    Payments to GSA............................        (87,957,000)        (89,971,000)        (89,971,000)           (89,971,000)          (+2,014,000)  ..................  ..................
    Building operations and maintenance........        (18,614,000)        (20,216,000)        (20,216,000)           (20,216,000)          (+1,602,000)  ..................  ..................
    Repairs, renovations, and construction.....        (28,622,000)        (25,587,000)        (25,587,000)           (25,587,000)          (-3,035,000)  ..................  ..................
Advisory committees (USDA).....................            928,000             885,000             800,000                650,000              -278,000            -235,000            -150,000 
Hazardous waste management.....................         15,700,000          15,700,000          15,700,000             15,700,000     ..................  ..................  ..................
Departmental administration....................         26,187,000          87,347,000          27,986,000             27,986,000            +1,799,000         -59,361,000   ..................
Office of the Assistant Secretary for                                                                                                                                                           
 Congressional Relations.......................          1,764,000           1,838,000           3,797,000              1,764,000     ..................            -74,000          -2,033,000 
Office of Communications.......................          8,198,000           8,890,000           8,198,000              8,198,000     ..................           -692,000   ..................
Office of the Inspector General................         63,418,000          64,739,000          63,639,000             63,639,000              +221,000          -1,100,000   ..................
Office of the General Counsel..................         25,992,000          27,860,000          27,860,000             27,860,000            +1,868,000   ..................  ..................
Office of the Under Secretary for Research,                                                                                                                                                     
 Education and Economics.......................            520,000             535,000             520,000                520,000     ..................            -15,000   ..................
Economic Research Service......................         53,936,000          54,665,000          53,131,000             53,526,000              -410,000          -1,139,000            +395,000 
National Agricultural Statistics Service.......         81,424,000          89,837,000          81,107,000             81,107,000              -317,000          -8,730,000   ..................
Agricultural Research Service..................        714,689,000         709,810,000         705,610,000            707,000,000            -7,689,000          -2,810,000          +1,390,000 
    Human Nutrition Information Service........        (10,618,000)  ..................  ..................  .......................  ..................  ..................  ..................
    Buildings and facilities...................         43,718,000          30,200,000          30,200,000             30,200,000           -13,518,000   ..................  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Agricultural Research Service.....        758,407,000         740,010,000         735,810,000            737,200,000           -21,207,000          -2,810,000          +1,390,000 
Cooperative State Research, Education, and                                                                                                                                                      
 Extension Activities:                                                                                                                                                                          
    Research and education activities..........        432,387,000         432,212,000         389,172,000            418,172,000           -14,215,000         -14,040,000         +29,000,000 
    Native Americans Institutions Endowment                                                                                                                                                     
     Fund......................................  ..................         (4,600,000)         (4,600,000)            (4,600,000)          (+4,600,000)  ..................  ..................
    Buildings and facilities...................         60,983,000   ..................  ..................            57,838,000            -3,145,000         +57,838,000         +57,838,000 
    Extension Activities.......................        438,744,000         437,552,000         413,257,000            437,131,000            -1,613,000            -421,000         +23,874,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Cooperative State Research,                                                                                                                                                        
       Education, and Extension Activities.....        932,114,000         869,764,000         802,429,000            913,141,000           -18,973,000         +43,377,000        +110,712,000 
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Marketing                                                                                                                                                 
 and Regulatory Programs.......................            605,000             625,000             605,000                605,000     ..................            -20,000   ..................
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service:                                                                                                                                                     
    Salaries and expenses......................        443,651,000         430,279,000         433,664,000            429,379,000           -14,272,000            -900,000          -4,285,000 
    Special fund, user fees \1\................        (96,660,000)       (100,254,000)       (100,254,000)          (100,254,000)          (+3,594,000)  ..................  ..................
    Buildings and facilities...................          4,973,000          12,541,000          12,541,000              4,973,000     ..................         -7,568,000          -7,568,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Animal and Plant Health Inspection                                                                                                                                                 
       Service.................................        448,624,000         442,820,000         446,205,000            434,352,000           -14,272,000          -8,468,000         -11,853,000 
Agricultural Marketing Service:                                                                                                                                                                 
    Marketing Services.........................         56,591,000          50,607,000          46,662,000             46,517,000           -10,074,000          -4,090,000            -145,000 
        New user fees..........................         (4,452,000)         (3,887,000)         (3,887,000)            (3,887,000)            (-565,000)  ..................  ..................
    (Limitation on administrative expenses,                                                                                                                                                     
     from fees collected)......................        (57,054,000)        (58,461,000)        (58,461,000)           (58,461,000)          (+1,407,000)  ..................  ..................
    Funds for strengthening markets, income,                                                                                                                                                    
     and supply (transfer from section 32).....         10,309,000          10,451,000          10,451,000             10,451,000              +142,000   ..................  ..................
    Payments to States and possessions.........          1,200,000           1,200,000           1,000,000              1,200,000     ..................  ..................           +200,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Agricultural Marketing Service....         68,100,000          62,258,000          58,113,000             58,168,000            -9,932,000          -4,090,000             +55,000 
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards                                                                                                                                                        
 Administration................................         23,314,000          23,679,000          23,058,000             23,289,000               -25,000            -390,000            +231,000 
    Inspection and Weighing Services                                                                                                                                                            
     (limitation on administrative expenses,                                                                                                                                                    
     from fees collected)......................        (42,784,000)        (42,784,000)        (42,784,000)           (42,784,000)    ..................  ..................  ..................
Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety..  ..................            580,000             450,000                440,000              +440,000            -140,000             -10,000 
Food Safety and Inspection Service.............        525,820,000         594,889,000         540,365,000            568,685,000           +42,865,000         -26,204,000         +28,320,000 
    Lab accreditation fees \2\.................         (1,000,000)         (1,000,000)         (1,000,000)            (1,000,000)    ..................  ..................  ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
      Total, Production, Processing, and                                                                                                                                                        
       Marketing...............................      3,183,023,000       3,254,178,000       3,062,196,000          3,191,693,000            +8,670,000         -62,485,000        +129,497,000 
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
            Farm Assistance Programs                                                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and                                                                                                                                                      
 Foreign Agricultural Services.................            549,000             570,000             549,000                549,000     ..................            -21,000   ..................
Consolidated Farm Service Agency:                                                                                                                                                               
    Salaries and expenses......................  ..................        811,771,000         788,388,000            805,888,000          +805,888,000          -5,883,000         +17,500,000 
    Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation                                                                                                                                                 
     Service, salaries and expenses............        721,333,000   ..................  ..................  .......................       -721,333,000   ..................  ..................
        (Transfer from export loans)...........           (589,000)           (608,000)           (589,000)              (589,000)    ..................           (-19,000)  ..................
        (Transfer from Public Law 480).........         (1,036,000)           (745,000)           (745,000)              (745,000)            (-291,000)  ..................  ..................
        (Transfer from ACIF)...................       (200,227,000)       (214,163,000)       (208,446,000)          (214,163,000)         (+13,936,000)  ..................        (+5,717,000)
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, salaries and expenses.........       (923,185,000)     (1,027,287,000)       (998,168,000)        (1,021,385,000)         (+98,200,000)        (-5,902,000)       (+23,217,000)
    State mediation grants.....................          3,000,000           3,000,000           2,000,000              3,000,000     ..................  ..................         +1,000,000 
    Dairy indemnity program....................  ..................            100,000             100,000                100,000              +100,000   ..................  ..................
    Outreach for socially disadvantaged farmers                                                                                                                                                 
     and ranchers..............................          2,995,000           3,000,000   ..................             2,000,000              -995,000          -1,000,000          +2,000,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total, Consolidated Farm Service Agency        727,328,000         817,871,000         790,488,000            810,988,000           +83,660,000          -6,883,000         +20,500,000 
Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program                                                                                                                                                      
 Account:                                                                                                                                                                                       
    Loan authorizations:                                                                                                                                                                        
        Farm ownership loans:                                                                                                                                                                   
            Direct.............................        (78,081,000)        (70,000,000)        (35,000,000)           (60,000,000)         (-18,081,000)       (-10,000,000)       (+25,000,000)
            Guaranteed.........................       (540,674,000)       (540,687,000)       (550,000,000)          (550,000,000)          (+9,326,000)        (+9,313,000)  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal.........................       (618,755,000)       (610,687,000)       (585,000,000)          (610,000,000)          (-8,755,000)          (-687,000)       (+25,000,000)
        Operating loans:                                                                                                                                                                        
            Direct.............................       (500,000,000)       (542,860,000)       (400,000,000)          (550,000,000)         (+50,000,000)        (+7,140,000)      (+150,000,000)
            Guaranteed unsubsidized............     (1,735,000,000)     (1,700,000,000)     (1,700,000,000)        (1,700,000,000)         (-35,000,000)  ..................  ..................
            Guaranteed subsidized..............       (230,000,000)       (200,000,000)       (200,000,000)          (200,000,000)         (-30,000,000)  ..................  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal.........................     (2,465,000,000)     (2,442,860,000)     (2,300,000,000)        (2,450,000,000)         (-15,000,000)        (+7,140,000)      (+150,000,000)
        Soil and water loans:                                                                                                                                                                   
            Direct.............................  ..................         (2,898,000)  ..................  .......................  ..................        (-2,898,000)  ..................
            Guaranteed.........................  ..................         (1,422,000)  ..................  .......................  ..................        (-1,422,000)  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal.........................  ..................         (4,320,000)  ..................  .......................  ..................        (-4,320,000)  ..................
        Indian tribe land acquisition loans....         (1,000,000)         (1,000,000)           (750,000)              (750,000)            (-250,000)          (-250,000)  ..................
        Emergency disaster loans...............       (100,000,000)       (100,000,000)       (100,000,000)          (100,000,000)    ..................  ..................  ..................
        Credit sales of acquired property......  ..................        (45,000,000)        (22,500,000)           (21,696,000)         (+21,696,000)       (-23,304,000)          (-804,000)
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Loan authorizations...........     (3,184,755,000)     (3,203,867,000)     (3,008,250,000)        (3,182,446,000)          (-2,309,000)       (-21,421,000)      (+174,196,000)
    Loan subsidies:                                                                                                                                                                             
        Farm ownership:                                                                                                                                                                         
            Direct.............................         10,983,000          16,373,000           8,187,000             14,034,000            +3,051,000          -2,339,000          +5,847,000 
            Guaranteed.........................         20,870,000          19,681,000          20,019,000             20,019,000              -851,000            +338,000   ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal.........................         31,853,000          36,054,000          28,206,000             34,053,000            +2,200,000          -2,001,000          +5,847,000 
        Farm operating:                                                                                                                                                                         
            Direct.............................         56,555,000          74,209,000          54,680,000             75,185,000           +18,630,000            +976,000         +20,505,000 
            Guaranteed unsubsidized............          9,360,000          18,360,000          18,360,000             18,360,000            +9,000,000   ..................  ..................
            Guaranteed subsidized..............         29,425,000          17,960,000          17,960,000             17,960,000           -11,465,000   ..................  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal.........................         95,340,000         110,529,000          91,000,000            111,505,000           +16,165,000            +976,000         +20,505,000 
        Soil and water loans:                                                                                                                                                                   
            Direct.............................  ..................            608,000   ..................  .......................  ..................           -608,000   ..................
            Guaranteed.........................  ..................             30,000   ..................  .......................  ..................            -30,000   ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal.........................  ..................            638,000   ..................  .......................  ..................           -638,000   ..................
        Indian tribe land acquisition..........            123,000             274,000             206,000                206,000               +83,000             -68,000   ..................
        Emergency disaster.....................         26,290,000          32,080,000          32,080,000             32,080,000            +5,790,000   ..................  ..................
        Credit sales of acquired property......  ..................          8,226,000           4,113,000              3,966,000            +3,966,000          -4,260,000            -147,000 
        Negative subsidies.....................           -782,000            -296,000   ..................  .......................           +782,000            +296,000   ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Loan subsidies................        152,824,000         187,505,000         155,605,000            181,810,000           +28,986,000          -5,695,000         +26,205,000 
    ACIF expenses:                                                                                                                                                                              
        Salaries and expenses..................        229,735,000         214,652,000         208,935,000            214,652,000           -15,083,000   ..................         +5,717,000 
        Administrative expenses................         14,031,000          12,606,000          12,606,000             12,606,000            -1,425,000   ..................  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, ACIF expenses.................        243,766,000         227,258,000         221,541,000            227,258,000           -16,508,000   ..................         +5,717,000 
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
          Total, Agricultural Credit Insurance                                                                                                                                                  
           Fund................................        396,590,000         414,763,000         377,146,000            409,068,000           +12,478,000          -5,695,000         +31,922,000 
              (Loan authorization).............     (3,184,755,000)     (3,203,867,000)     (3,008,250,000)        (3,182,446,000)          (-2,309,000)       (-21,421,000)      (+174,196,000)
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
          Total, Farm Assistance Programs......      1,124,467,000       1,233,204,000       1,168,183,000          1,220,605,000           +96,138,000         -12,599,000         +52,422,000 
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
                  CORPORATIONS                                                                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation: Federal                                                                                                                                                     
 crop insurance corporation fund...............        219,107,000       1,263,708,000       1,263,708,000          1,263,708,000        +1,044,601,000   ..................  ..................
Commodity Credit Corporation:                                                                                                                                                                   
    Reimbursement for net realized losses......     15,500,000,000      10,400,000,000      10,400,000,000         10,400,000,000        -5,100,000,000   ..................  ..................
    Hazardous waste (limitation on                                                                                                                                                              
     administrative expenses)..................         (5,000,000)         (5,000,000)         (5,000,000)            (5,000,000)    ..................  ..................  ..................
        Borrowing authority (emergency)........      1,000,000,000   ..................  ..................  .......................     -1,000,000,000   ..................  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Corporations..................     16,719,107,000      11,663,708,000      11,663,708,000         11,663,708,000        -5,055,399,000   ..................  ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
          Total, title I, Agricultural Programs     21,026,597,000      16,151,090,000      15,894,087,000         16,076,006,000        -4,950,591,000         -75,084,000        +181,919,000 
              (By transfer)....................       (201,852,000)       (215,516,000)       (209,780,000)          (215,497,000)         (+13,645,000)           (-19,000)        (+5,717,000)
              (Loan authorization).............     (3,184,755,000)     (3,203,867,000)     (3,008,250,000)        (3,182,446,000)          (-2,309,000)       (-21,421,000)      (+174,196,000)
              (Limitation on administrative                                                                                                                                                     
               expenses).......................       (104,838,000)       (106,245,000)       (106,245,000)          (106,245,000)          (+1,407,000)  ..................  ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
        TITLE II--CONSERVATION PROGRAMS                                                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Office of the Under Secretary for Natural                                                                                                                                                       
 Resources and Environment.....................            677,000             696,000             677,000                677,000     ..................            -19,000   ..................
Natural Resource Conservation Service:                                                                                                                                                          
    Conservation operations....................        556,062,000         645,735,000         629,986,000            637,860,000           +81,798,000          -7,875,000          +7,874,000 
    River basin surveys, investigations, and                                                                                                                                                    
     watershed planning........................  ..................  ..................         14,000,000   .......................  ..................  ..................        -14,000,000 
    River basin surveys and investigations.....         12,970,000          11,210,000   ..................             8,369,000            -4,601,000          -2,841,000          +8,369,000 
    Watershed planning.........................         10,546,000           7,542,000   ..................             5,630,000            -4,916,000          -1,912,000          +5,630,000 
    Watershed and flood prevention operations..         70,000,000         100,000,000         100,000,000            100,000,000           +30,000,000   ..................  ..................
    Resource conservation and development,                                                                                                                                                      
     Great Plains conservation program,                                                                                                                                                         
     forestry incentives program, and Colorado                                                                                                                                                  
     River Basin salinity control program......  ..................  ..................         36,000,000   .......................  ..................  ..................        -36,000,000 
    Resource conservation and development......         32,845,000          28,900,000   ..................            27,000,000            -5,845,000          -1,900,000         +27,000,000 
    Great Plains conservation program..........         15,172,000          11,000,000   ..................  .......................        -15,172,000         -11,000,000   ..................
    Forestry incentives program................          6,625,000           6,625,000   ..................             6,325,000              -300,000            -300,000          +6,325,000 
    Colorado River Basin salinity control                                                                                                                                                       
     program...................................          4,500,000           2,681,000   ..................             1,000,000            -3,500,000          -1,681,000          +1,000,000 
    Wetlands reserve program...................         93,200,000         210,000,000         210,000,000             77,000,000           -16,200,000        -133,000,000        -133,000,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Natural Resource Conservation                                                                                                                                                      
       Service.................................        801,920,000       1,023,693,000         989,986,000            863,184,000           +61,264,000        -160,509,000        -126,802,000 
Consolidated Farm Service Agency:                                                                                                                                                               
    Agricultural conservation program..........        100,000,000          50,000,000          75,000,000             50,000,000           -50,000,000   ..................        -25,000,000 
        Water quality incentives program.......        (15,000,000)        (15,000,000)        (11,000,000)           (15,000,000)    ..................  ..................        (+4,000,000)
    Emergency conservation program.............  ..................          3,000,000   ..................  .......................  ..................         -3,000,000   ..................
    Conservation reserve program...............      1,743,274,000       1,926,370,000       1,781,785,000          1,781,785,000           +38,511,000        -144,585,000   ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Consolidated Farm Service Agency..      1,843,274,000       1,979,370,000       1,856,785,000          1,831,785,000           -11,489,000        -147,585,000         -25,000,000 
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
      Total, title II, Conservation Programs...      2,645,871,000       3,003,759,000       2,847,448,000          2,695,646,000           +49,775,000        -308,113,000        -151,802,000 
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
    TITLE III--RURAL ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY                                                                                                                                                     
              DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Office of the Under Secretary for Rural                                                                                                                                                         
 Economic and Community Development............            568,000             586,000             568,000                568,000     ..................            -18,000   ..................
Rural Community Advancement Program............  ..................  ..................  ..................           528,839,000          +528,839,000        +528,839,000        +528,839,000 
    Administrative expenses....................  ..................  ..................  ..................            58,051,000           +58,051,000         +58,051,000         +58,051,000 
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
Rural Housing and Community Development                                                                                                                                                         
 Service:                                                                                                                                                                                       
    Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program                                                                                                                                                        
     Account:                                                                                                                                                                                   
        Loan authorizations:                                                                                                                                                                    
            Low-income housing (sec. 502)......     (1,200,000,000)     (1,200,000,000)       (550,000,000)        (1,000,000,000)        (-200,000,000)      (-200,000,000)      (+450,000,000)
                Unsubsidized guaranteed........     (1,000,000,000)     (1,300,000,000)     (1,700,000,000)        (1,700,000,000)        (+700,000,000)      (+400,000,000)  ..................
            Housing repair (sec. 504)..........        (35,000,000)        (35,000,000)        (35,000,000)           (35,000,000)    ..................  ..................  ..................
            Farm labor (sec. 514)..............        (15,915,000)        (16,482,000)        (15,000,000)           (15,000,000)            (-915,000)        (-1,482,000)  ..................
            Rental housing (sec. 515)..........       (190,476,000)       (170,000,000)       (150,000,000)          (150,000,000)         (-40,476,000)       (-20,000,000)  ..................
            Site loans (sec. 524)..............           (632,000)           (632,000)           (600,000)              (600,000)             (-32,000)           (-32,000)  ..................
            Credit sales of acquired property..  ..................        (75,000,000)        (35,000,000)           (42,484,000)         (+42,484,000)       (-32,516,000)        (+7,484,000)
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan authorizations.......     (2,442,023,000)     (2,797,114,000)     (2,485,600,000)        (2,943,084,000)        (+501,061,000)      (+145,970,000)      (+457,484,000)
        Loan subsidies:                                                                                                                                                                         
            Single family (sec. 502):                                                                                                                                                           
                Direct.........................        227,520,000         251,880,000         115,445,000            209,900,000           -17,620,000         -41,980,000         +94,455,000 
                Unsubsidized guaranteed........         17,200,000           2,210,000           2,890,000              2,890,000           -14,310,000            +680,000   ..................
            Housing repair (sec. 504)..........         11,690,000          14,193,000          14,193,000             14,193,000            +2,503,000   ..................  ..................
            Farm labor (sec. 514)..............          7,911,000           9,482,000           8,629,000              8,629,000              +718,000            -853,000   ..................
            Rental housing (sec. 515):                                                                                                                                                          
                Direct.........................        100,000,000          92,973,000          82,035,000             82,035,000           -17,965,000         -10,938,000   ..................
                Unsubsidized guaranteed........         (1,000,000)  ..................         (1,000,000)  .......................        (-1,000,000)  ..................        (-1,000,000)
            Credit sales of acquired property..  ..................         13,073,000           6,100,000              7,405,000            +7,405,000          -5,668,000          +1,305,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan subsidies............        364,321,000         383,811,000         229,292,000            325,052,000           -39,269,000         -58,759,000         +95,760,000 
        RHIF administrative expenses...........        389,818,000         395,211,000         385,889,000            389,818,000     ..................         -5,393,000          +3,929,000 
        Rental assistance:                                                                                                                                                                      
            (Sec. 521).........................        517,108,000         565,583,000         530,000,000            535,000,000           +17,892,000         -30,583,000          +5,000,000 
            (Sec. 502(c)(5)(D))................          5,900,000           5,900,000           5,900,000              5,900,000     ..................  ..................  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Rental assistance.........        523,008,000         571,483,000         535,900,000            540,900,000           +17,892,000         -30,583,000          +5,000,000 
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
              Total, Rural Housing Insurance                                                                                                                                                    
               Fund............................      1,277,147,000       1,350,505,000       1,151,081,000          1,255,770,000           -21,377,000         -94,735,000        +104,689,000 
                  (Loan authorization).........     (2,442,023,000)     (2,797,114,000)     (2,485,600,000)        (2,943,084,000)        (+501,061,000)      (+145,970,000)      (+457,484,000)
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
    Self-Help Housing Land Development Fund:                                                                                                                                                    
        Loan authorization.....................           (603,000)           (603,000)           (603,000)              (603,000)    ..................  ..................  ..................
        Loan subsidy...........................             11,000              31,000              31,000                 31,000               +20,000   ..................  ..................
        Administrative expenses................             14,000   ..................  ..................  .......................            -14,000   ..................  ..................
    Rural Community Facility Loans Program                                                                                                                                                      
     Account:                                                                                                                                                                                   
        Loan authorizations:                                                                                                                                                                    
            Direct.............................       (225,000,000)  ..................       (200,000,000)  .......................      (-225,000,000)  ..................      (-200,000,000)
            Guaranteed.........................        (75,000,000)  ..................        (75,000,000)  .......................       (-75,000,000)  ..................       (-75,000,000)
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan authorizations.......       (300,000,000)  ..................       (275,000,000)  .......................      (-300,000,000)  ..................      (-275,000,000)
        Loan subsidies:                                                                                                                                                                         
            Direct.............................         21,375,000   ..................         34,880,000   .......................        -21,375,000   ..................        -34,880,000 
            Guaranteed.........................          3,728,000   ..................          3,555,000   .......................         -3,728,000   ..................         -3,555,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan subsidies............         25,103,000   ..................         38,435,000   .......................        -25,103,000   ..................        -38,435,000 
    Administrative expenses....................  ..................  ..................          8,836,000   .......................  ..................  ..................         -8,836,000 
    Very low-income housing repair grants......         24,900,000          24,900,000          24,900,000             24,900,000     ..................  ..................  ..................
    Rural housing for domestic farm labor......         10,900,000          10,900,000          10,000,000             10,000,000              -900,000            -900,000   ..................
    Mutual and self-help housing...............         12,650,000          12,650,000          12,650,000             12,650,000     ..................  ..................  ..................
    Supervisory and technical assistance grants  ..................          2,500,000   ..................             1,000,000            +1,000,000          -1,500,000          +1,000,000 
    Rural community fire protection grants.....          3,400,000   ..................          1,000,000              3,000,000              -400,000          +3,000,000          +2,000,000 
    Compensation for construction defects......            495,000             495,000             495,000                495,000     ..................  ..................  ..................
    Rural housing preservation grants..........         22,000,000          22,000,000          11,000,000             11,000,000           -11,000,000         -11,000,000   ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, grants and payments............         74,345,000          73,445,000          60,045,000             63,045,000           -11,300,000         -10,400,000          +3,000,000 
    RHCDS expenses:                                                                                                                                                                             
        Administrative expenses................  ..................         53,650,000          42,820,000             50,346,000           +50,346,000          -3,304,000          +7,526,000 
        (Transfer from RHIF)...................       (389,818,000)       (382,074,000)       (372,898,000)          (376,860,000)         (-12,958,000)        (-5,214,000)        (+3,962,000)
        (Transfer from ACIF)...................  ..................           (171,000)           (171,000)              (171,000)            (+171,000)  ..................  ..................
        (Transfer from RCFLP)..................  ..................        (11,114,000)         (8,731,000)  .......................  ..................       (-11,114,000)        (-8,731,000)
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, RHCDS expenses................       (389,818,000)       (447,009,000)       (424,620,000)          (427,377,000)         (+37,559,000)       (-19,632,000)        (+2,757,000)
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
          Total, Rural Housing and Community                                                                                                                                                    
           Development Service.................      1,376,620,000       1,477,631,000       1,301,248,000          1,369,192,000            -7,428,000        -108,439,000         +67,944,000 
              (Loan authorization).............     (2,742,626,000)     (2,797,717,000)     (2,761,203,000)        (2,943,687,000)        (+201,061,000)      (+145,970,000)      (+182,484,000)
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
Rural Business and Cooperative Development                                                                                                                                                      
 Service:                                                                                                                                                                                       
    Rural Business and Industry Loans Program                                                                                                                                                   
     Account:                                                                                                                                                                                   
        Loan authorizations:                                                                                                                                                                    
            Direct.............................  ..................  ..................  ..................  .......................  ..................  ..................  ..................
            Guaranteed.........................       (500,000,000)  ..................       (500,000,000)  .......................      (-500,000,000)  ..................      (-500,000,000)
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, loan authorizations.......       (500,000,000)  ..................       (500,000,000)  .......................      (-500,000,000)  ..................      (-500,000,000)
        Loan subsidies:                                                                                                                                                                         
            Direct.............................  ..................  ..................  ..................  .......................  ..................  ..................  ..................
            Guaranteed.........................          4,750,000   ..................          6,437,000   .......................         -4,750,000   ..................         -6,437,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan subsidies............          4,750,000   ..................          6,437,000   .......................         -4,750,000   ..................         -6,437,000 
    Administrative expenses....................  ..................  ..................         14,868,000   .......................  ..................  ..................        -14,868,000 
    Rural Development Loan Fund Program                                                                                                                                                         
     Account:                                                                                                                                                                                   
        (Loan authorization)...................        (88,038,000)  ..................         (7,246,000)           (30,000,000)         (-58,038,000)       (+30,000,000)       (+22,754,000)
        Loan subsidy...........................         46,000,000   ..................          4,322,000             17,895,000           -28,105,000         +17,895,000         +13,573,000 
        Administrative expenses................          1,476,000   ..................  ..................             1,476,000     ..................         +1,476,000          +1,476,000 
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
          Total, Rural Development Loan Fund...         47,476,000   ..................          4,322,000             19,371,000           -28,105,000         +19,371,000         +15,049,000 
              (Loan authorization).............        (88,038,000)  ..................         (7,246,000)           (30,000,000)         (-58,038,000)       (+30,000,000)       (+22,754,000)
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
    Rural Economic Development Loans Program                                                                                                                                                    
     Account:                                                                                                                                                                                   
        Direct loans (limitation on                                                                                                                                                             
         obligations)..........................        (12,865,000)        (14,091,000)        (12,865,000)           (12,865,000)    ..................        (-1,226,000)  ..................
        Direct subsidy.........................          3,077,000           4,085,000           3,729,000              3,729,000              +652,000            -356,000   ..................
        Administrative expenses................  ..................            864,000             584,000                724,000              +724,000            -140,000            +140,000 
    Alternative Agricultural Research and                                                                                                                                                       
     Commercialization Revolving Fund..........          5,000,000           8,000,000           5,000,000             10,000,000            +5,000,000          +2,000,000          +5,000,000 
        Loan authorization.....................  ..................        (25,000,000)  ..................  .......................  ..................       (-25,000,000)  ..................
        Loan subsidy...........................  ..................          7,138,000   ..................  .......................  ..................         -7,138,000   ..................
        Administrative expenses................  ..................            500,000   ..................  .......................  ..................           -500,000   ..................
    Rural business enterprise grants...........         47,500,000   ..................         45,000,000   .......................        -47,500,000   ..................        -45,000,000 
    Rural technology and cooperative                                                                                                                                                            
     development grants........................          1,750,000   ..................          1,500,000              1,500,000              -250,000          +1,500,000   ..................
    Local technical assistance and planning                                                                                                                                                     
     grants....................................  ..................  ..................  ..................  .......................  ..................  ..................  ..................
    RBCDS expenses:                                                                                                                                                                             
        Salaries and expenses..................         57,294,000   ..................          9,520,000              9,013,000           -48,281,000          +9,013,000            -507,000 
        Salaries and expenses, FmHA............         37,811,000   ..................  ..................  .......................        -37,811,000   ..................  ..................
        (Transfer from RBILP)..................  ..................        (19,582,000)        (14,747,000)  .......................  ..................       (-19,582,000)       (-14,747,000)
        (Transfer from RDLFP)..................         (1,476,000)         (2,948,000)  ..................            (1,470,000)              (-6,000)        (-1,478,000)        (+1,470,000)
        (Transfer from RETLP)..................  ..................           (864,000)           (584,000)              (724,000)            (+724,000)          (-140,000)          (+140,000)
        Self-Help HLDF (by transfer)...........            (14,000)  ..................  ..................  .......................           (-14,000)  ..................  ..................
        RBCDS (by transfer)....................  ..................  ..................  ..................  .......................  ..................  ..................  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, RBCDS expenses................        (96,595,000)        (23,394,000)        (24,851,000)           (11,207,000)         (-85,388,000)       (-12,187,000)       (-13,644,000)
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
          Total, Rural Business and Cooperative                                                                                                                                                 
           Development Service.................        204,658,000          20,587,000          90,960,000             44,337,000          -160,321,000         +23,750,000         -46,623,000 
              (By transfer)....................         (1,490,000)        (23,394,000)        (15,331,000)            (2,194,000)            (+704,000)       (-21,200,000)       (-13,137,000)
              (Loan authorization).............       (588,038,000)        (25,000,000)       (507,246,000)           (30,000,000)        (-558,038,000)        (+5,000,000)      (-477,246,000)
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
Rural Utilities Service:                                                                                                                                                                        
    Loan authorizations:                                                                                                                                                                        
        Water and waste disposal facility                                                                                                                                                       
         loans: Direct.........................       (905,523,000)  ..................  ..................  .......................      (-905,523,000)  ..................  ..................
    Loan subsidies: Water and sewer: Direct....        126,502,000   ..................  ..................  .......................       -126,502,000   ..................  ..................
    Administrative expenses....................  ..................  ..................  ..................  .......................  ..................  ..................  ..................
    Rural Electrification and Telephone Loans                                                                                                                                                   
     Program Account:                                                                                                                                                                           
        Loan authorizations:                                                                                                                                                                    
            Direct loans:                                                                                                                                                                       
                Electric 5 percent.............       (100,000,000)       (100,000,000)        (90,000,000)           (90,000,000)         (-10,000,000)       (-10,000,000)  ..................
                Telephone 5 percent............        (54,534,000)        (75,000,000)        (70,000,000)           (70,000,000)         (+15,466,000)        (-5,000,000)  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal.....................       (154,534,000)       (175,000,000)       (160,000,000)          (160,000,000)          (+5,466,000)       (-15,000,000)  ..................
            Treasury rate: Telephone...........       (297,000,000)       (300,000,000)       (300,000,000)          (300,000,000)          (+3,000,000)  ..................  ..................
            Muni-rate: Electric................       (575,250,000)       (575,250,000)       (500,000,000)          (550,000,000)         (-25,250,000)       (-25,250,000)       (+50,000,000)
            FFB loans:                                                                                                                                                                          
                Electric, regular..............       (300,000,000)       (400,000,000)       (300,000,000)          (300,000,000)    ..................      (-100,000,000)  ..................
                Telephone......................       (120,000,000)       (120,000,000)       (120,000,000)          (120,000,000)    ..................  ..................  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal.....................       (420,000,000)       (520,000,000)       (420,000,000)          (420,000,000)    ..................      (-100,000,000)  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Total, Loan authorizations...     (1,446,784,000)     (1,570,250,000)     (1,380,000,000)        (1,430,000,000)         (-16,784,000)      (-140,250,000)       (+50,000,000)
        Loan subsidies:                                                                                                                                                                         
            Direct loans:                                                                                                                                                                       
                Electric 5 percent.............          9,703,000          23,520,000          21,168,000             21,168,000           +11,465,000          -2,352,000   ..................
                Telephone 5 percent............          3,997,000          14,955,000          13,958,000             13,958,000            +9,961,000            -997,000   ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal.....................         13,700,000          38,475,000          35,126,000             35,126,000           +21,426,000          -3,349,000   ..................
            Treasury rate: Telephone...........             60,000              60,000              60,000                 60,000     ..................  ..................  ..................
            Muni-rate, electric................         46,020,000          62,300,000          54,150,000             59,565,000           +13,545,000          -2,735,000          +5,415,000 
            FFB loans: Electric, regular.......            450,000           3,360,000           2,520,000              2,520,000            +2,070,000            -840,000   ..................
            Negative subsidy...................  ..................         -1,715,000   ..................  .......................  ..................         +1,715,000   ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan subsidies............         60,230,000         102,480,000          91,856,000             97,271,000           +37,041,000          -5,209,000          +5,415,000 
        RETLP administrative expenses..........         29,982,000          34,385,000          29,982,000             32,183,000            +2,201,000          -2,202,000          +2,201,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural Electrification and                                                                                                                                                      
           Telephone Loans Program Account.....         90,212,000         136,865,000         121,838,000            129,454,000           +39,242,000          -7,411,000          +7,616,000 
              (Loan authorization).............     (1,446,784,000)     (1,570,250,000)     (1,380,000,000)        (1,430,000,000)         (-16,784,000)      (-140,250,000)       (+50,000,000)
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
    Rural Telecommunication Partnership Loan                                                                                                                                                    
     Program Account:                                                                                                                                                                           
        Loan authorization.....................  ..................        (15,000,000)  ..................  .......................  ..................       (-15,000,000)  ..................
        Loan subsidy...........................  ..................            594,000   ..................  .......................  ..................           -594,000   ..................
        Administrative expenses................  ..................          1,110,000   ..................  .......................  ..................         -1,110,000   ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total................................  ..................          1,704,000   ..................  .......................  ..................         -1,704,000   ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
    Rural Telephone Bank Program Account:                                                                                                                                                       
        Direct loans (limitation on                                                                                                                                                             
         obligations)..........................       (175,000,000)  ..................       (175,000,000)          (175,000,000)    ..................      (+175,000,000)  ..................
        Direct loan subsidy....................            770,000   ..................            770,000              5,023,000            +4,253,000          +5,023,000          +4,253,000 
        RTB salaries and expenses..............          8,794,000   ..................          3,541,000              6,167,000            -2,627,000          +6,167,000          +2,626,000 
    Distance Learning and Medical Link Grants..          7,500,000          15,000,000           7,500,000              7,500,000     ..................         -7,500,000   ..................
    Rural water and waste disposal grants......        500,000,000   ..................  ..................  .......................       -500,000,000   ..................  ..................
    Solid waste management grants..............          2,995,000   ..................  ..................  .......................         -2,995,000   ..................  ..................
    Rural Utilities Performance Partnerships                                                                                                                                                    
     Program...................................  ..................  ..................        435,000,000   .......................  ..................  ..................       -435,000,000 
    Solid waste management grants, rural water                                                                                                                                                  
     and waste disposal grants, and water and                                                                                                                                                   
     waste disposal facility loans (admin.                                                                                                                                                      
     expenses).................................  ..................  ..................         12,740,000   .......................  ..................  ..................        -12,740,000 
    RUS salaries and expenses..................  ..................         19,627,000          19,211,000             18,449,000           +18,449,000          -1,178,000            -762,000 
        Electric and telephone loans (by                                                                                                                                                        
         transfer).............................        (29,982,000)        (34,385,000)        (29,982,000)           (32,183,000)          (+2,201,000)        (-2,202,000)        (+2,201,000)
        Rural telephone bank (by transfer).....         (8,794,000)  ..................         (3,541,000)            (6,167,000)          (-2,627,000)        (+6,167,000)        (+2,626,000)
        Water and waste disposal loans (by                                                                                                                                                      
         transfer).............................  ..................        (17,790,000)  ..................  .......................  ..................       (-17,790,000)  ..................
        Rural Telecommunication Partnership                                                                                                                                                     
         Loan (by transfer)....................  ..................         (1,110,000)  ..................  .......................  ..................        (-1,110,000)  ..................
        Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund (by                                                                                                                                                  
         transfer).............................  ..................           (318,000)           (318,000)              (318,000)            (+318,000)  ..................  ..................
        Rural partnership (by transfer)........  ..................  ..................        (12,623,000)  .......................  ..................  ..................       (-12,623,000)
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal.............................        (38,776,000)        (73,230,000)        (65,675,000)           (57,117,000)         (+18,341,000)       (-16,113,000)        (-8,558,000)
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
          Total, Rural Utilities Service.......        736,773,000         173,196,000         600,600,000            166,593,000          -570,180,000          -6,603,000        -434,007,000 
              (By transfer)....................        (38,776,000)        (53,603,000)        (46,464,000)           (38,668,000)            (-108,000)       (-14,935,000)        (-7,796,000)
              (Loan authorization).............     (2,352,307,000)     (1,585,250,000)     (1,380,000,000)        (1,430,000,000)        (-922,307,000)      (-155,250,000)       (+50,000,000)
              (Limitation on obligations)......       (175,000,000)  ..................       (175,000,000)          (175,000,000)    ..................      (+175,000,000)  ..................
Rural Development Performance Partnership                                                                                                                                                       
 program.......................................  ..................      1,049,974,000   ..................  .......................  ..................     -1,049,974,000   ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
      Total, title III, Rural Economic and                                                                                                                                                      
       Community Development Programs..........      2,318,619,000       2,721,974,000       1,993,376,000          2,167,580,000          -151,039,000        -554,394,000        +174,204,000 
          (By transfer)........................       (430,084,000)       (470,356,000)       (443,595,000)          (417,893,000)         (-12,191,000)       (-52,463,000)       (-25,702,000)
          (Loan authorization).................     (5,682,971,000)     (4,407,967,000)     (4,648,449,000)        (4,403,687,000)      (-1,279,284,000)        (-4,280,000)      (-244,762,000)
          (Limitation on obligations)..........       (187,865,000)        (14,091,000)       (187,865,000)          (187,865,000)    ..................      (+173,774,000)  ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
        TITLE IV--DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS                                                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Office of the Under Secretary for Food,                                                                                                                                                         
 Nutrition and Consumer Services...............            540,000             553,000             440,000                540,000     ..................            -13,000            +100,000 
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
Food and Consumer Service:                                                                                                                                                                      
    Child nutrition programs...................      2,202,274,000       2,399,942,000       2,354,566,000          2,354,752,000          +152,478,000         -45,190,000            +186,000 
        Transfer from section 32...............      5,249,077,000       5,520,492,000       5,597,858,000          5,597,858,000          +348,781,000         +77,366,000   ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Child nutrition programs......      7,451,351,000       7,920,434,000       7,952,424,000          7,952,610,000          +501,259,000         +32,176,000            +186,000 
    Special milk program.......................         18,089,000   ..................  ..................  .......................        -18,089,000   ..................  ..................
    Special supplemental nutrition program for                                                                                                                                                  
     women, infants, and children (WIC)........      3,470,000,000       3,820,000,000       3,729,807,000          3,729,807,000          +259,807,000         -90,193,000   ..................
    (By transfer)..............................  ..................  ..................         (4,000,000)            (4,000,000)          (+4,000,000)        (+4,000,000)  ..................
    Commodity supplemental food program........         84,500,000          86,000,000   ..................            86,000,000            +1,500,000   ..................        +86,000,000 
    Food stamp program:                                                                                                                                                                         
        Expenses...............................     25,187,710,000      26,119,887,000      25,954,828,000         25,954,828,000          +767,118,000        -165,059,000   ..................
        Reserve................................      2,500,000,000       2,500,000,000   ..................         1,000,000,000        -1,500,000,000      -1,500,000,000      +1,000,000,000 
        Nutrition assistance for Puerto Rico...      1,130,528,000       1,143,000,000       1,143,000,000          1,143,000,000           +12,472,000   ..................  ..................
            Cattle tick eradication............         12,472,000   ..................  ..................  .......................        -12,472,000   ..................  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Food stamp program........     28,830,710,000      29,762,887,000      27,097,828,000         28,097,828,000          -732,882,000      -1,665,059,000      +1,000,000,000 
    Food donations programs for selected                                                                                                                                                        
     groups:                                                                                                                                                                                    
        Needy family program...................         33,154,000          78,639,000          65,000,000             66,000,000           +32,846,000         -12,639,000          +1,000,000 
        Elderly feeding program................        150,000,000         151,250,000         150,000,000            151,250,000            +1,250,000   ..................         +1,250,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal.............................        183,154,000         229,889,000         215,000,000            217,250,000           +34,096,000         -12,639,000          +2,250,000 
        Soup kitchens..........................         40,000,000          40,000,000   ..................            40,000,000     ..................  ..................        +40,000,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Food donations programs.......        223,154,000         269,889,000         215,000,000            257,250,000           +34,096,000         -12,639,000         +42,250,000 
    The emergency food assistance program......         40,000,000          40,000,000   ..................            40,000,000     ..................  ..................        +40,000,000 
        Commodity purchases--TEFAP.............         25,000,000   ..................  ..................  .......................        -25,000,000   ..................  ..................
    Commodity assistance program...............  ..................  ..................        168,000,000   .......................  ..................  ..................       -168,000,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, The emergency food assistance                                                                                                                                                      
       program.................................         65,000,000          40,000,000         168,000,000             40,000,000           -25,000,000   ..................       -128,000,000 
    Nutrition Initiatives:                                                                                                                                                                      
        Nutrition support......................  ..................         45,526,000   ..................  .......................  ..................        -45,526,000   ..................
        Nutrition promotion....................  ..................          4,218,000   ..................  .......................  ..................         -4,218,000   ..................
    Food program administration................        106,465,000         141,360,000         108,323,000            107,215,000              +750,000         -34,145,000          -1,108,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Food and Consumer Service.........     40,249,269,000      42,090,314,000      39,271,382,000         40,270,710,000           +21,441,000      -1,819,604,000        +999,328,000 
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
      Total, title IV, Domestic Food Programs..     40,249,809,000      42,090,867,000      39,271,822,000         40,271,250,000           +21,441,000      -1,819,617,000        +999,428,000 
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
    TITLE V--FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED                                                                                                                                                     
                    PROGRAMS                                                                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Foreign Agricultural Service, direct                                                                                                                                                            
 appropriation.................................        108,880,000         120,201,000         114,547,000            115,802,000            +6,922,000          -4,399,000          +1,255,000 
    (Transfer from Commodity Credit                                                                                                                                                             
     Corporation)..............................         (4,914,000)         (5,176,000)         (5,176,000)            (5,176,000)            (+262,000)  ..................  ..................
    (Transfer from export loans)...............         (2,792,000)         (3,137,000)         (2,792,000)            (2,792,000)    ..................          (-345,000)  ..................
    (Transfer from Public Law 480).............         (1,425,000)         (1,005,000)         (1,005,000)            (1,005,000)            (-420,000)  ..................  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Program level.....................       (118,011,000)       (129,519,000)       (123,520,000)          (124,775,000)          (+6,764,000)        (-4,744,000)        (+1,255,000)
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
Scientific activities overseas (foreign                                                                                                                                                         
 currency program) (limitation on                                                                                                                                                               
 administrative expenses)......................         (1,062,000)  ..................  ..................  .......................        (-1,062,000)  ..................  ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
Public Law 480 Program Account:                                                                                                                                                                 
    Title I--Credit sales:                                                                                                                                                                      
        Program level..........................       (320,342,000)       (177,957,000)       (316,342,000)          (316,342,000)          (-4,000,000)      (+138,385,000)  ..................
            Direct loans.......................       (291,342,000)       (161,540,000)       (291,342,000)          (291,342,000)    ..................      (+129,802,000)  ..................
            Ocean freight differential.........         29,000,000          16,417,000          25,000,000             25,000,000            -4,000,000          +8,583,000   ..................
    Title II--Commodities for disposition                                                                                                                                                       
     abroad:                                                                                                                                                                                    
        Program level..........................       (821,100,000)       (795,703,000)       (821,100,000)          (821,100,000)    ..................       (+25,397,000)  ..................
        Appropriation..........................        821,100,000         795,703,000         821,100,000            821,100,000     ..................        +25,397,000   ..................
    Title III--Commodity grants:                                                                                                                                                                
        Program level..........................       (117,442,000)        (50,000,000)        (50,000,000)           (50,000,000)         (-67,442,000)  ..................  ..................
        Appropriation..........................        117,442,000          50,000,000          50,000,000             50,000,000           -67,442,000   ..................  ..................
    Loan subsidies.............................        236,162,000         131,833,000         236,162,000            236,162,000     ..................       +104,329,000   ..................
    Debt restructuring.........................  ..................          1,500,000   ..................  .......................  ..................         -1,500,000   ..................
    Salaries and expenses:                                                                                                                                                                      
        General Sales Manager..................          1,425,000           1,005,000           1,005,000              1,005,000              -420,000   ..................  ..................
        CFSA...................................          1,036,000             745,000             745,000                745,000              -291,000   ..................  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal.............................          2,461,000           1,750,000           1,750,000              1,750,000              -711,000   ..................  ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
          Total, Public Law 480:                                                                                                                                                                
              Program level....................     (1,258,884,000)     (1,023,660,000)     (1,187,442,000)        (1,187,442,000)         (-71,442,000)      (+163,782,000)  ..................
              Appropriation....................      1,206,165,000         997,203,000       1,134,012,000          1,134,012,000           -72,153,000        +136,809,000   ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
CCC Export Loans Program Account:                                                                                                                                                               
    Loan guarantees:                                                                                                                                                                            
        Short-term export credit...............     (5,000,000,000)     (5,200,000,000)     (5,200,000,000)        (5,200,000,000)        (+200,000,000)  ..................  ..................
        Intermediate export credit.............       (500,000,000)       (500,000,000)       (500,000,000)          (500,000,000)    ..................  ..................  ..................
        Emerging democracies export credit.....       (200,000,000)  ..................  ..................  .......................      (-200,000,000)  ..................  ..................
    Loan subsidy...............................        394,393,000         374,347,000         374,347,000            374,347,000           -20,046,000   ..................  ..................
    Salaries and expenses (Export Loans):                                                                                                                                                       
        General Sales Manager..................          2,792,000           3,137,000           2,792,000              2,792,000     ..................           -345,000   ..................
        ASCS...................................            589,000             608,000             589,000                589,000     ..................            -19,000   ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, CCC Export Loans Program                                                                                                                                                       
           Account.............................        397,774,000         378,092,000         377,728,000            377,728,000           -20,046,000            -364,000   ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
          Total, title V, Foreign assistance                                                                                                                                                    
           and related programs................      1,712,819,000       1,495,496,000       1,626,287,000          1,627,542,000           -85,277,000        +132,046,000          +1,255,000 
              (By transfer)....................         (9,131,000)         (9,318,000)         (8,973,000)            (8,973,000)            (-158,000)          (-345,000)  ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
  TITLE VI--RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG                                                                                                                                                  
                 ADMINISTRATION                                                                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                                                                
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES                                                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                                                                                
          Food and Drug Administration                                                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Salaries and expenses, direct appropriation....        819,971,000         828,999,000         819,971,000            819,971,000     ..................         -9,028,000   ..................
    Prescription drug user fee act.............        (79,423,000)        (84,723,000)        (84,723,000)           (84,723,000)          (+5,300,000)  ..................  ..................
    Mammography clinics user fee...............         (6,500,000)        (13,000,000)        (13,000,000)           (13,000,000)          (+6,500,000)  ..................  ..................
    New user fees..............................  ..................        (38,740,000)  ..................  .......................  ..................       (-38,740,000)  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Program level.....................       (905,894,000)       (965,462,000)       (917,694,000)          (917,694,000)         (+11,800,000)       (-47,768,000)  ..................
Buildings and facilities.......................         18,150,000           8,350,000          15,350,000              8,350,000            -9,800,000   ..................         -7,000,000 
Rental payments................................         46,294,000          46,294,000          46,294,000             46,294,000     ..................  ..................  ..................
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Food and Drug Administration......        884,415,000         883,643,000         881,615,000            874,615,000            -9,800,000          -9,028,000          -7,000,000 
                                                                                                                                                                                                
           DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY                                                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Financial Management Service: Payments to the                                                                                                                                                   
 farm credit system financial assistance                                                                                                                                                        
 corporation...................................         57,026,000          15,453,000          15,453,000             15,453,000           -41,573,000   ..................  ..................
                                                                                                                                                                                                
              INDEPENDENT AGENCIES                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Commodity Futures Trading Commission...........         49,144,000          59,711,000          49,144,000             54,058,000            +4,914,000          -5,653,000          +4,914,000 
Farm Credit Administration (limitation on                                                                                                                                                       
 administrative expenses)......................        (40,420,000)        (39,900,000)  ..................  .......................       (-40,420,000)       (-39,900,000)  ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
      Total, title VI, Related Agencies and                                                                                                                                                     
       Food and Drug Administration............        990,585,000         958,807,000         946,212,000            944,126,000           -46,459,000         -14,681,000          -2,086,000 
          (Limitation on administrative                                                                                                                                                         
           expenses)...........................        (40,420,000)        (39,900,000)  ..................  .......................       (-40,420,000)       (-39,900,000)  ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
      Grand total:                                                                                                                                                                              
          New budget (obligational) authority..     68,944,300,000      66,421,993,000      62,579,232,000         63,782,150,000        -5,162,150,000      -2,639,843,000      +1,202,918,000 
          (By transfer)........................       (641,067,000)       (695,190,000)       (666,348,000)          (646,363,000)          (+5,296,000)       (-48,827,000)       (-19,985,000)
          (Loan authorization).................    (14,567,726,000)    (13,311,834,000)    (13,356,699,000)       (13,286,133,000)      (-1,281,593,000)       (-25,701,000)       (-70,566,000)
          (Limitation on administrative                                                                                                                                                         
           expenses)...........................       (146,320,000)       (146,145,000)       (106,245,000)          (106,245,000)         (-40,075,000)       (-39,900,000)  ..................
          (Limitation on obligations)..........       (187,865,000)        (14,091,000)       (187,865,000)          (187,865,000)    ..................      (+173,774,000)  ..................
                                                ================================================================================================================================================
                 RECAPITULATION                                                                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Title I--Agricultural programs.................     21,026,597,000      16,151,090,000      15,894,087,000         16,076,006,000        -4,950,591,000         -75,084,000        +181,919,000 
Title II--Conservation programs................      2,645,871,000       3,003,759,000       2,847,448,000          2,695,646,000           +49,775,000        -308,113,000        -151,802,000 
Title III--Farmers Home and Rural development                                                                                                                                                   
 programs......................................      2,318,619,000       2,721,974,000       1,993,376,000          2,167,580,000          -151,039,000        -554,394,000        +174,204,000 
Title IV--Domestic food programs...............     40,249,809,000      42,090,867,000      39,271,822,000         40,271,250,000           +21,441,000      -1,819,617,000        +999,428,000 
Title V--Foreign assistance and related                                                                                                                                                         
 programs......................................      1,712,819,000       1,495,496,000       1,626,287,000          1,627,542,000           -85,277,000        +132,046,000          +1,255,000 
Title VI--Related agencies and Food and Drug                                                                                                                                                    
 Administration................................        990,585,000         958,807,000         946,212,000            944,126,000           -46,459,000         -14,681,000          -2,086,000 
                                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, new budget (obligational)                                                                                                                                                          
       authority...............................     68,944,300,000      66,421,993,000      62,579,232,000         63,782,150,000        -5,162,150,000      -2,639,843,000      +1,202,918,000 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Such sums as available from AQI user fee account for fiscal year 1996.                                                                                                                      
\2\ In addition to appropriation.