Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
1669103
label
1975/10/13 HR9600 Budget Authority Rescission
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1669103
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
1975/10/13 HR9600 Budget Authority Rescission
citationUrl
collections
White House Records Office: Legislation Case Files
Legislation Case Files
subjects
Department of the Interior. 1849-
Federal budget
Legislation
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1669103
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1975-10-31
month
10
year
1975
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1975-10-01
month
10
year
1975
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
f97e105d212f9032
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 31, folder "10/13/75 HR9600 Budget Authority
Rescission" of the White House Records Office: Legislation Case Files at the Gerald R.
Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Exact duplicates within this folder were not digitized.
& 10/13/75
APPROVED OCT13 OCT 13
ACTION
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Last Day: October 15
October 11, 1975
Posted 10/13/75 FROM:
MEMORANDUM FOR
THE PRESIDENT
JIM CANNON
a
To archines
SUBJECT:
H.R. 9600 - Budget Authority Rescission
10/14/25
Attached for your consideration is H.R. 9600, sponsored by
Representative Mahon, which rescinds $47.5 million in
1976 contract authority for the purchase of helium by
the Department of Interior. This recission is in the
amount and form you proposed.
A discussion of the enrolled bill is provided in OMB's
enrolled bill report at Tab A.
OMB, Interior, Max Friedersdorf, Counsel's Office (Lazarus)
and I recommend approval of the enrolled bill.
RECOMMENDATION
That you sign H.R. 9600 at Tab B.
FORD is GERALD LIBRA
Digitized from Box 31 of the White House Records Office Legislation Case Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
PRESIDENT
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE
STATE
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
STATES
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
OCT 9 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
Subject: Enrolled Bill H.R. 9600 - Budget Authority Rescission
Last Day for Action: October 15, 1975 - Wednesday
Purpose: Rescinds $47.5 million in 1976 contract authority
for purchase of helium by the Department of the Interior.
Perspective
There is no basis for objecting to the single item included in
this rescission bill. The $47.5 million rescission for contract
authority to purchase helium is in the amount and form you
proposed. Consequently, I recommend that you sign H.R. 9600
into law.
The enrolled bill is objectionable only in that it fails to
include three of your proposed rescissions. The Congress, by its
inaction and under the terms of the Impoundment Control Act of
1974, has forced the loss of $51.4 million in 1976 budget
authority savings for these three items and a portion of a
fourth item.
Nevertheless, most budget authority you recommended for rescission
in 1976 is currently being saved--$162.5 million out of $213.9
million recommended. This result has been achieved through a
combination of (1) Congressional action outside the enrolled bill
and (2) funds lapsing before the date on which they would otherwise
have been required to be released. All the events--Congressional
and circumstantial--that affect your first eight 1976 rescission
proposals are discussed in the attached longer memorandum and their
budget authority and outlay effects are displayed in a table
attached to that memorandum.
Recommendation
That you sign the bill into law.
James T. Lynn
Director
Attachment
PRESIDENT
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
STATE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
OCT 9 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
Subject: Enrolled Bill H.R. 9600 - Budget Authority Rescission
Sponsor - Representative Mahon (D), Texas
Last Day for Action
October 15, 1975 - Wednesday
Purpose
Rescinds $47.5 million in 1976 contract authority for the
purchase of helium by the Department of the Interior.
Agency Recommendations
Office of Management and Budget
Approval
Department of the Interior
Approval (informally)
Discussion
The enrolled bill is one of Congress' actions in response to
the eight rescissions you have proposed for fiscal year 1976
under section 1012 of the Impoundment Control Act of 1974
(Public Law 93-344). The attached table details the savings
realized--$162.5 million in 1976 budget authority and
$45 million in 1976 and transition quarter outlays--and the
savings lost--$51.4 million in 1976 budget authority and
$13.4 million in 1976 and transition quarter outlays--as a
result of Congressional action and inaction on the eight
proposals included in your messages to the Congress of July 1
and July 26, 1975.
Through this enrolled bill, Congress is approving one of the
eight proposals transmitted to date: the rescission of
$47.5 million in 1976 contract authority for the purchase of
helium. Purchase of helium by the Federal Government was
2
terminated in 1973, but a 1961 law automatically makes
$47.5 million in contract authority available each fiscal
year. The contract authority would not have been used had
it been made available.
Through means other than this enrolled bill, the Congress
acted favorably on two more of your eight proposals:
- both the House and Senate have included language in
the pending 1976 Transportation appropriations bill
that would, as you requested, rescind $25 million for
access highways to public recreation areas on lakes.
In the same bill, however, both Houses included a
direct appropriation of $10 million for the same
program. Consequently, only $15 million of the
$25 million you proposed will be saved.
- the House and Senate Appropriations Committees invited
the $90 million proposed for rescission for the
Great River Road (to run through 10 States bordering
the Mississippi River) to be deferred--instead of
released on September 23, 1975, as would have otherwise
been required--while the Congress continues to review
the project. In your fourth 1976 special message to
the Congress on impoundments, you accepted this
invitation.
The savings associated with your two rescission proposals for
the Community Services Administration are secure for the
present--but as a result of the funds lapsing before they
were required, under terms of the Impoundment Control Act, to
be released. The Congress did not act to approve these
rescissions which total $10 million. Moreover, the Senate
version of the pending 1976 Labor-HEW appropriations bill
would make these funds available until December 31, 1975.
Three of your rescission proposals have been released, as is
routinely required when the Congress does not act, within
a specified 45 day period, to approve the rescissions. They
are:
- $25.7 million that would have reduced the amount
available for construction of forest roads and
trails (Forest Service, Department of Agriculture),
3
- $8.7 million that is not expected to be spent this
fiscal year for construction of the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center (Treasury), and
- $7.0 million that would have reduced the amount
available for the Head Start program (Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare).
Recommendation
I recommend that you sign the bill into law, thus rescinding
an unnecessary $47.5 million in 1976 contract authority.
Jos James T. Lynn I.by
Director
Attachment
ATTACHMENT
DISPOSITION OF FIRST EIGHT 1976
RESCISSION PROPOSALS
UNDER THE IMPOUNDMENT CONTROL ACT OF 1974
(in millions of dollars)
Outlay Savings
1976
1976 and
budget
transition
authority
quarter
1977
Savings realized:
Approved by Congress:
-enrolled rescission bill
(Helium Fund, Interior)
47.5
--
:
-pending Transportation
appropriation bill
(access highways to lakes,
Transportation)
*
15.0
6.3
12.1
-invitation to defer funds proposed
for rescission (Great River Road,
Transportation)
90.0
28.7
50.0
Funds lapsed before required
release date (Community Services
Administration -two proposals)
10.0
10.0
:
Total, savings realized
162.5
45.0
62.1
Savings lost:
Agriculture: Forest Service:
Forest Roads and Trails
25.7
5.0
11.0
Treasury: construction of
Federal Law Enforcement Training
Center
8.7
I
|
HEW: Head Start
7.0
6.7
.3
Transportation: access highways
to lakes*
10.0
1.7
1.9
Total, savings lost
51.4
13.4
13.2
*The Congress, in effect, partially approved ($15 million) and partially
rejected ($10 million) the President's rescission request ($25 million)
for access highways to lakes.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 11, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR THE STAFF SECRETARY
FROM:
MAX L. FRIEDERSDORF RKW
SUBJECT:
H.R. 9600 - Budget Authority Rescission
The Office of Legislative Affairs has reviewed the subject
bill and concurs in the recommendation that it be signed.
THE WHITE HOUSE
ACTION MEMORANDUM
WASHINGTON
LOG NO.: 581
Date: October 10
Time: 700am
FOR ACTION: Paul Leach
cc (for information): Jim Cavanaugh
Max Friedersdorf
Jack Marsh
Ken Lazarus
Warren Hendriks
FROM THE STAFF SECRETARY
DUE: Date: October 11
Time: noon
SUBJECT:
H.R. 9600 - Budget Authority Rescission
ACTION REQUESTED:
For Necessary Action
For Your Recommendations
Prepare Agenda and Brief
Draft Reply
For Your Comments
Draft Remarks
REMARKS:
Please return to Judy Johnston, Ground Floor West Wing
PLEASE ATTACH THIS COPY TO MATERIAL SUBMITTED.
If you have any questions or if you anticipate a
delay in submitting the required material, please
K. R. COLE, JR.
telephone the Staff Secretary immediately.
For the President
To: Saves 10/10/75 Cavanaugh
11:15 Gem
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE
OFFICE OF management AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
OCT 9 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
Subject: Enrolled Bill H.R. 9600 - Budget Authority Rescission
Last Day for Action: October 15, 1975 - Wednesday
Purpose: Rescinds $47.5 million in 1976 contract authority
for purchase of helium by the Department of the Interior.
Perspective
There is no basis for objecting to the single item included in
this rescission bill. The $47.5 million rescission for contract
authority to purchase helium is in the amount and form you
proposed. Consequently, I recommend that you sign H.R. 9600
into law.
The enrolled bill is objectionable only in that it fails to
include three of your proposed rescissions. The Congress, by its
inaction and under the terms of the Impoundment Control Act of
1974, has forced the loss of $51.4 million in 1976 budget
authority savings for these three items and a portion of a
fourth item.
Nevertheless, most budget authority you recommended for rescission
in 1976 is currently being saved--$162.5 million out of $213.9
million recommended. This result has been achieved through a
combination of (1) Congressional action outside the. enrolled bill
and (2) funds lapsing before the date on which they would otherwise
have been required to be released. All the events--Congressional
and circumstantial--that affect your first eight 1976 rescission
proposals are discussed in the attached longer memorandum and their
budget authority and outlay effects are displayed in a table
attached to that memorandum.
Recommendation
That you sign the bill into law.
James T. Lynn
Director
Attachment
94TH CONGRESS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
REPORT
1st Session
No. 94-496
BUDGET RESCISSION BILL, FISCAL YEAR 1976
SEPTEMBER 19, 1975.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. MAHON, from the Committee on Appropriations,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany H.R. 9600]
The Committee on Appropriations, to whom was referred the bill
H.R. 9600, to rescind certain budget authority recommended in the
Message of the President of July 26, 1975 (H. Doc. 94-225), trans-
mitted pursuant to the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, report
the same to the House with amendments and with the recommendation
that the bill as amended be passed.
The amendments are as follows:
Page 2, strike lines 1 through 7.
Page 2, strike lines 8 through 18.
Page 3, strike lines 1 through 11.
SUMMARY OF THE BILL
This is the fourth rescission bill to be reported by the Committee
on Appropriations during the 94th Congress under the provisions of
Title x of the new Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control
Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), July 12, 1974.
The Presidential message of July 26, 1975 contains five rescissions
which have not been acted on by the House. This bill and report
reflect the recommendations of the Committee on Appropriations
on those items. In addition, the Presidential message of July 1, 1975
(H. Doc. 94-206) transmitted 3 rescissions which are discussed in the
report but are not included in the accompanying bill. Further, the
Comptroller General, on June 19, 1975 notified the Speaker of the
57-006
2
3
House (H. Doc. 94-193) that there was in fact a rescission of budget
authority in the College Housing Programs of HUD in the amount
of $964,000,000. Thus there are 9 rescissions pending before the
Congress. The Committee is recommending approval of one rescission.
Amounts to be
made available
for obligation
$7, 000, 000
2, 500, 000
7, 500, 000
25, 723, 000
90, 000, 000
8, 665, 000
141, 388, 000
ACTIONS IN OTHER THAN RESCISSION BILL
In two instances, rescissions addressed in this report have been
accomplished in the 1976 regular appropriation bills. Rescission
75-901 (College housing loan program) was negated by House and
Senate action in passing the HUD-Independent Agencies Appropria-
tion Act for 1976 which included a transfer of $964,000,000 from the
Amounts rec-
ommended for
rescission in bill
47, 500, 000
College Housing program to other HUD programs. Funds identified
the amount of $25,000,000 were rescinded in the Transportation and
COMPARISON OF RESCISSIONS PROPOSED IN H. DOCS. 94-193, 94-206, 94-225, AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
$47,500, 000
in 76-2 (access highways to public recreation areas on certain lakes) in
Related Agencies Appropriation Act, 1976. That bill includes a direct
appropriation of $10,000,000 for access highways to public recreation
areas on certain lakes-a net reduction in budget authority of $15,-
000,000.
Amounts proposed
for rescission
$7, 000, 000
2, 500, 000
7, 500, 000
47, 500, 000
25, 723, 000
90, 000, 000
8, 665, 000
188, 888, 000
INFLATIONARY IMPACT STATEMENT
Pursuant to clause 2(1) (4) Rule XI of the House of Representatives,
the Committee estimates that the enactment of this bill will have no
inflationary impact on prices and costs in the operation of the national
economy. Rescission of the funds proposed in this bill will mean that
obligational authority in the amount of $47,500,000 will not become
available for obligation in fiscal 1976.
SUMMARY TABLE
A summary table on rescissions follows which shows the items that
are recommended for rescission and those items that the Committee
is not recommending for rescission and for which funds are to be made
available at the end of the 45-day time period.
Department and activity
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare:
Headstart services to handicapped children
Community Services Administration:
Basic skills learning centers demonstration programs
Community development corporation programs
Department of Interior:
Bureau of Mines, helium fund
Department of Agriculture:
Forest Service, Forest roads and trails
Department of Transportation:
National scenic and recreational highway
Department of the Treasury:
Construction of federal law enforcement training
center
Total
Rescission
No.
76-5
76-7
76-8
76-6
76-4
76-1
76-3
4
5
5
6
9
8
6
Report
page
No.
4
5
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, AND
neference made in the rescission message to the increases requested
HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, AND RELATED
in the budget for 1976 appears to be a gratuitous argument for re-
scinding 1975 funds. The House has already considered 1976 ap-
AGENCIES
propriations for Head Start based upon the full amount appropriated
DANIEL J. FLOOD, Pennsylvania, Chairman
for fiscal year 1975 and has increased the 1976 budget by $15.7 million
ROBERT H. MICHEL, Illinois
for the purpose of adequately serving the handicapped.
WILLIAM H. NATCHER, Kentucky
NEAL SMITH, Iowa
GARNER E. SHRIVER, Kansas
In denying the rescission, the Committee expects HEW to obligate
BOB CASEY, Texas
SILVIO O. CONTE, Massachusetts
the $7,000,000 in a judicious manner but at the earliest practical
EDWARD J. PATTEN, New Jersey
date.
DAVID R. OBEY, Wisconsin
RELATED AGENCIES
EDWARD R. ROYBAL, California
LOUIS STOKES, Ohio
COMMUNITY SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAM
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
The Committee does not recommend approval of the two proposed
rescissions totalling $10,000,000 for the Community Services Adminis-
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
tration. The funds proposed for rescission were appropriated in the
Second Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1975 (P.L. 94-32) and were
The Committee has not approved the rescission of $7,000,000 for
made available for obligation until September 30, 1975.
the Head Start program. The funds proposed for rescission were
The first of the proposed rescissions is $2,500,000 for research and
appropriated in the Second Supplemental Appropriations Act for
demonstration. The total amount appropriated for research and
1975 (Public Law 94-32) and were made available for obligation until
demonstration in fiscal year 1975 was $8,800,000. The amount pro-
October 31, 1975.
posed for rescission is intended to be used for the expansion of the
For fiscal year 1975, Congress appropriated $441 million for the
basic skills learning centers demonstration program. This program
Head Start program, an increase of $26,700,000 over the budget
is designed to improve the reading and mathematics skills of children
request. Of the amount added by the Congress, $11,700,000 was to
who are below the national norms. This is done through a compre-
help offset increased operating costs due to inflation, and $15,000,000
hensive program of individualized instruction with each student
was to meet the additional cost of providing services to handicapped
operating at his own pace. The program is in the very early develop-
children. The proposed rescission of $7,000,000 relates to funds
mental stage, and the Committee believes that it should be tested
appropriated for services to handicapped children. The President's
further to determine its potential for success. No convincing casé was
message transmitting the proposed rescission indicates that $7,000,000
made by the agency for discontinuing the program.
represents the amount in excess of estimated budgetary requirements
The second proposed rescission is $7,500,000 for community eco-
to initiate special services for handicapped children. The message
nomic development under Title VII of the Community Services Act.
further refers to increased funding requested for handicapped children
The total amount appropriated for the basic Title VII program in
in the 1976 budget. After reviewing the budget documents and hearing
fiscal year 1975 was $46,500,000. The program provides support for
testimony from Administration witnesses, the Committee concluded
economic and community development in urban and rural areas with
that the budget is based on a minimum effort in the enrollment of
high concentrations of poor people through community development
handicapped children. In fact the budget is inadequate to meet the
corporations and cooperatives. The Committee believes that the
additional cost of providing services to handicapped children.
Congress was justified in providing an increase for the program in
The basic law mandates that handicapped children must comprise
fiscal year 1975, since it had operated at an almost static level of
at least 10 percent of the total enrollment nationwide. Beginning in
funding for several years prior to that. Again, the agency presented no
fiscal year 1976 the law requires that 10 percent of each State's en-
convincing testimony for rescinding these funds.
rollment must be handicapped children. The 1975 budget made no
The Committee strongly urges the executive branch to make these
specific request for serving handicapped children, apparently in the
funds available for obligation at once SO that they can be obligated by
belief that some States had already enrolled sufficient numbers of
September 30. If they are not, the funds will lapse and revert to the
handicapped children to meet the statutory enrollment minimum.
Treasury on that date. This would clearly be a violation of the spirit,
In reviewing fiscal year 1975 program requirements, the Congress
if not the letter, of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
felt that the budget did not make adequate provision for meeting
Control Act.
the additional cost of serving handicapped children. For that reason,
$15 million was specifically included in the fiscal year 1975 appropria-
tion. Because of the late enactment of the second supplemental ap-
propriation bill, the availability of $7,000,000 was extended to Octo-
ber 31 to allow sufficient time to obligate the funds for use in the
present school year. There was no intention to stretch out the use
of these funds to augment 1976 appropriations.
6
7
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE DEPARTMENT OF THE
In addition, the Committee has received information indicating
INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES
that the estimated $47.9 million available from 10 percent of 1976
SIDNEY R. YATES, Illinois, Chairman
National Forest receipts and which are merged with this account,
will fall below what was projected in the President's budget for fiscal
GUNN McKAY, Utah
JOSEPH M. McDADE, Pennsylvania
year 1976.
CLARENCE D. LONG, Maryland
RALPH S. REGULA, Ohio
FRANK E. EVANS, Colorado
JOHN P. MURTHA, Pennsylvania
ROBERT DUNCAN, Oregon
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF MINES
HELIUM FUND
The Committee recommends a rescission of $47,500,000 in contract
authority available to the Bureau of Mines for the Helium Fund as
requested in Rescission Proposal No. R76-6, House Document
94-225. The contract authority is available under authority contained
in the Helium Act Amendments of 1960 (P.L. 87-122). Contracts
entered into pursuant to that authority for the purchase of helium
for storage and future use were terminated by the Department of the
Interior in 1973. Since helium deliveries are no longer being accepted
by the Department, there is no need to use the available authority in
fiscal year 1976.
At the present time, there is about 40 billion cubic feet of helium
in underground storage at the Cliffside Field near Amarillo, Texas.
Current annual domestic use of helium is about one-half billion cubic
feet.
The helium purchase contracts are not now in force, but suits by
three of the contractors claiming damages for breach of contract are
pending in the U.S. Court of Claims. The government's liability, if
any, in these cases will not be finally determined before the end of the
current fiscal year. Even if damages are awarded, the funds for such
damages would not come out of this appropriation.
RELATED AGENCIES
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FOREST SERVICE
FOREST ROADS AND TRAILS
The Committee recommends that the proposed rescission of $25,-
723,000 in contract authority available to the Forest Service for
forest roads and trails not be approved. The proposed rescission is
R76-4, House Document 94-225.
The Committee in its fiscal year 1976 report (94-374) emphasized
the need for an expanded forest road and trail program, not only to
provide for the harvesting of forest resources, but also to provide for
other benefits, such as recreation and public use. To assist in im-
proving the recreation potential and other benefits the Committee,
with the concurrence of the House, approved a forest roads and trails
contract authority program of $173,538,000, an increase of $15.4
million' above that proposed by the Administration.
8
9
SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OF
SUBSOMMITTEE ON TREASURY, POSTAL SERVICE
TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES
AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT
JOHN J. McFALL, California, Chairman
TOM STEED, Oklahoma, Chairman
SIDNEY R. YATES, Illinois
SILVIO O. CONTE, Massachusetts
JOSEPH P. ADDABBO, New York
ToM STEED, Oklahoma
JACK EDWARDS, Alabama
EDWARD R. ROYBAL California
CLARENCE E. MILLER, Ohio
EDWARD I. KOCH, New York
ROBERT L. F. SIKES, Florida
ROBERT C. McEWEN, New York
BILL ALEXANDER, Arkansas
EDWARD P. BOLAND,
WILLIAM Colorado L. ARMSTRONG,
ROBERT DUNCAN, Oregon
Massachusetts
JOHN J. FLYNT, JR., Georgia
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
EDWARD J. PATTEN, New Jersey
CLARENCE D. LONG, Maryland
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
NATIONAL SCENIC AND RECREATIONAL HIGHWAY
FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER
The Committee has considered and recommends disapproval of the
rescission, R76-1, for the National Scenic and Recreational Highway
CONSTRUCTION
(The Great River Road), which was proposed by the President in his
July 1, 1975, message. The request is for the rescission of budget
The Committee recommends that the proposed rescission of $8,665,-
authority in the amount of $90,000,000. The Committee received
Center be denied.
000 for the construction of the Federal Law Enforcement Training
testimony on this request on July 31, 1975.
Under Title X of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
The Committee feels that proposed rescission may be premature.
Control Act, the $90,000,000 contained in R76-1 will have to be made
The total cost of establishing the Training Center at Glynco,
rvailable for obligation on September 22, 1975, unless Congress
Georgia has not yet been determined and the Committee believes that
approves the rescission. As indicated above, the Committee is not
the funds appropriated for construction ought not be rescinded until
aecommending approval of the proposed rescission. The Committee,
it is determined exactly what the requirements at Glynco will be.
however, feels that more information is needed with respect to the
The Committee will reconsider this matter later when more
definite information is available.
National Scenic and Recreational Highway. The Committee, there-
fore, expects the Department of Transportation and the ten States
involved to develop specific plans and present further testimony on
the scope and cost of the project.
Because of the need to review this additional information, the
Committee would be receptive to the consideration of a proposal to
temporarily defer the funding for this project. Such a proposal would
enable the Committee to receive additional testimony prior to making
a further recommendation on the release of $90,000,000.
ACCESS HIGHWAY TO PUBLIC RECREATION AREAS ON CERTAIN LAKES
This program is authorized by Section 115(a) of the Federal-Aid
Highway Amendments of 1974. The Federal Highway Administration
interprets that legislation as providing $25,000,000 of contract author-
ity for access highways to public recreation areas on certain lakes.
Others do not agree with this interpretation.
On July 10, 1975, the House passed the Department of Transporta-
tion and Related Agencies Appropriation Bill which includes a direct
appropriation of $10,000,000 for access highways to public recreation
areas on certain lakes. The bill also includes language to rescind the
contract authority, if there ever was any. On July 25, 1975, the Senate
concurred in the House action.
10
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOP-
MENT-INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
EDWARD P. BOLAND, Massachusetts, Chairman
JOE L. EVINS, Tennessee
BURT L. TALCOTT, California
GEORGE E. SHIPLEY, Illinois
JOSEPH M. McDADE, Pennsylvania
J. EDWARD ROUSH, Indiana
C. W. BILL YOUNG, Florida
BOB TRAXLER, Michigan
MAX BAUCUS, Montana
LOUIS STOKES, Ohio
YVONNE BRATHWAITE BURKE,
California
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATIONS
COLLEGE HOUSING-LOANS AND OTHER EXPENSES
In a message to the Congress of June 19, 1975, (H. Doc. 94-193)
the Comptroller General held that the discontinuation of the College
Housing Loan Program constituted a rescission of budget authority
not previously reported to the Congress.
The Comptroller General noted that as of September 30, 1974, the
remaining available balance in the college housing direct loan fund
totaled approximately $1.1 billion, of which $964 million had been
specifically provided for the direct loan program. The Comptroller
General indicated that, at a minimum, the $964 million constituted
a rescission.
On June 24, the HUD-Independent Agency Appropriation Bill
passed the House and included a provision transferring $964,000,000
of college housing budget authority to the Community Development
Block Grant program. The Senate concurred with the transfer on
July 26. The Congress in other legislation is therefore utilizing the
funds in lieu of taking action in a rescission bill.
Calendar No. 395
94TH CONGRESS
SENATE
REPORT
1st Session
No. 94-403
FIRST BUDGET RESCISSION BILL, FISCAL YEAR 1976
SEPTEMBER 30 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 11), 1975.-Ordered to be printed
Mr. McCLELLAN, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted
the following
REPORT
together with
VIEWS
of the Committee on the Budget
[To accompany H.R. 9600]
The Committee on Appropriations, to which was referred the bill
(H.R. 9600) to rescind certain budget authority recommended in the
message of the President of July 26, 1975 (H. Doc. 94-225, S. Doc.
94-93), transmitted pursuant to the Impoundment Control Act of
1974, reports the same with the recommendation that the bill be
passed, and submits the following explanation of its recommendation,
together with the views of the Committee on the Budget, to which
the bill was also referred.
SUMMARY OF THE BILL
This is the first rescission bill to be reported by the Committee
on Appropriations during fiscal year 1976 under the provisions of
Title X of the new Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control
Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), July 12, 1974.
The Presidential message of July 26, 1975 contains five rescissions
which have not been acted on by the House. This bill and report
reflect the recommendations of the Committee on Appropriations
on those items. In addition, the Presidential message of July 1, 1975
57-010
2
3
(S. Doc. 94-70), transmitted 3 rescissions which are discussed in the
report but are not included in the accompanying bill. Further, the
Comptroller General, on June 19, 1975 notified the Speaker of the
House (H. Doc. 94-193) that there was in fact a rescission of budget
authority in the College Housing Programs of HUD in the amount
of $964,000,000. Thus there are 9 rescissions pending before the
Amounts rec-
ommended for
rescission by
the Committee
on Appropriations
$47, 500, 000
47, 500, 000
Congress. The Committee is recommending approval of one rescission.
ACTIONS IN OTHER THAN RESCISSION BILL
In two instances, rescissions addressed in this report have been
accomplished in the 1976 regular appropriation bills. Rescission
75-901 (College housing loan program) was negated by House and
Senate action in passing the HUD-Independent Agencies Appropria-
Amounts rec-
ommended for
rescission by the
House
$47, 500, 000
47, 500, 000
tion Act for 1976 which included a transfer of $964,000,000 from the
College Housing program to other HUD programs. Funds identified
in Rescission 76-2 (access highways to public recreation areas on
certain lakes) in the amount of $25,000,000 were rescinded in the
Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriation Act, 1976. That
bill includes a direct appropriation of $10,000,000 for access highways
COMPARISON OF RESCISSIONS PROPOSED IN S. DOCS. 94-70, 94-93 AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
Amounts proposed
for rescission
$7, 000, 000
2, 500, 000
7, 500, 000
47, 500, 000
25, 723, 000
90, 000, 000
8, 665, 000
188, 888, 000
to public recreation areas on certain lakes-a net reduction in budget
authority of $15,000,000.
SUMMARY TABLE
A summary table on rescissions follows which shows the items that
are recommended for rescission and those items that the Committee
is not recommending for rescission. The views of the Committee on the
Budget are shown on page 11.
Department and activity
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare:
Headstart services to handicapped children
Community Services Administration:
Basic skills learning centers demonstration programs
Community development corporation programs
Department of Interior:
Bureau of Mines, helium fund
Department of Agriculture:
Forest Service, Forest roads and trails
Department of Transportation:
National scenic and recreational highway
Department of the Treasury:
Construction of federal law enforcement training
center
Total
Rescission
No.
76-5
76-7
76-8
76-6
76-4
76-1
76-3
4
5
5
7
8
6
10
Report
page
No.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM
Rescission No.: R76-5
Date Proposed: July 26, 1957
Rescissions No.: R76-7 and R76-8
Date Proposed: July 26, 1975
Specific Programs Affected: Headstart programs
Total Available Budgetary Resources-New BA: $69,800,000;
Available Budgetary Resources-New BA: $441,000,000;
BA: Other $
Other BA : $
Total of Proposed Rescissions : $10,000,000
Amount of Proposed Rescission: $7,000,000
Presidential Rationale for Proposed Rescissions: The rescission is pro-
Presidential Rationale for Proposed Rescission: Funds proposed for
posed as means to restrain 1976 budget outlays. The proposed with-
rescission were appropriated for the purpose of initiating special
drawal of funds would eliminate the Congressional increase for
services for handicapped children enrolled in Head Start. Ac-
this activity to the President's budget for fiscal year 1975.
cording to the rescission message, $19.7 million already obligated
House Action: Disapproved both rescissions.
for this purpose is sufficient.
Committee Recommendations:
House Action: Disapproved rescission
The Committee disapproves these two rescissions totaling
Committee Recommendation:
$10,000,000 for the Community Services Administration.
The Committee concurs with the House in disapproving the
The first rescission of $2,500,000 would have required that one
rescission of $7,000,000 for the Headstart program. The proposed
of the basic skills learning centers now in operation be ter-
rescission would have limited the quality and quantity of services
minated in October 1975. These centers are designed to im-
provided to handicapped children. Additional funds were pro-
prove reading and math skills of children below the national
vided by Congress because the budget request underestimated the
norms. If the centers should be forced to close before the comple-
cost of services.
tion of evaluations of their effectiveness, the substantial invest-
More than 34,900 handicapped children are expected to enroll
ment of funds to date in these demonstration projects would be
in Headstart. The average cost per child could be as much as
wasted.
double that of other children ($1,278). In many cases, projects
The Community Services Administration's exclusive focus on
must plan on additional and substantial costs associated with
individuals in poverty makes these programs highly valuable and
enrollment and proper care for the handicapped, such as diagnostic
unlike demonstration projects of any other agency. Testimony
teachers. services, special equipment, modification of facilities, and special
presented to the Committee did not provide convincing justifica-
tion for terminating this program.
The Committee expects the Department to obligate these funds
The second rescission of $7,500,000 would have eliminated the
without further delay. Further, the Department is cautioned
June, 1975 Congressional increase for the community economic
against any premature plans to delay the obligation of fiscal year
development program provided in the fiscal 1975 Second Supple-
1976 appropriations.
mental appropriations bill.
Due to budgetary restraints, no new projects have been de-
(4)
veloped for several years. These additional funds will help over-
come stagnation by expanding the 35 existing projects and
establishing several new ones. Through investment in business
ventures, this program is designed to both employ and train low-
income persons and to upgrade the communities in which they
live. Many of these projects have been successful for a decade.
New projects, such as the Lumni Indian Aquaculture project in
Washington State, have shown promise of developing unsubsi-
dized profit-making enterprises.
(5)
6
Economic recovery from the current recession should be en-
couraged through expansion of programs such as this aimed at
helping enterprises that might otherwise go out of business.
The Committee urges the Executive Branch to immediately
obligate these funds before September 30, 1975 to avoid the laps-
ing of these funds back to the Treasury.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
The Committee feels very strongly that if these funds are
BUREAU OF MINES
allowed to lapse, the budgetary process and Congressional pre-
rogative would be seriously undermined. Further, the Committee
HELIUM FUND
has clearly indicated its position on the use of these funds in past
appropriation measures. The late rescission request by the Execu-
Rescission No.: R76-6
Date Proposed: July 26, 1975
tive branch will cause unnecessary and very harmful program de-
lays as well as the setting of a very negative precedent.
Available Budgetary Resources-New BA $47,500,000;
Other BA : $17,944,540
Amount of Proposed Rescission: $47,500,000
Presidential Rationale for Proposed Rescission: Termination of
helium purchase contracts for which budget authority was enacted
under P.L. 87-122.
House Action: Approved rescission
Committee Recommendation: The Committee recommends approval
of the rescission of $47,500,000 in contract authority for helium
purchases under P.L. 87-122. Purchase contracts were terminated
by the Interior Department in 1973 and the contract authority is
no longer needed. Any future payments to contractors arising
from pending suits before the U.S. Court of Claims would be paid
from a separate appropriation.
(7)
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
FOREST SERVICE
NATIONAL SCENIC AND RECREATIONAL HIGHWAY
FOREST ROADS AND TRAILS
Rescission No.: R76-1
Date Proposed: July 1, 1975
Rescission No.: R76-4
Date Proposed: July 26, 1975
Available Budgetary Resources-New BA : $
;
Available Budgetary Resources-New BA. $47,975,000 1
Other BA. $90,000,000
Other BA : $418,286,000
Amount of Proposed Rescission: $90,000,000
Amount Proposed Rescission: $25,723,000
Presidential Rationale for Proposed Rescission: "This program will
Presidential Rationale for Proposed Rescission: $25,723,000 in con-
not produce national benefits commensurate with its cost." Esti-
tract authority available under Federal-Aid Highway Act is not
mated Federal share of the project's cost is $1.17 billion, which is
needed under the President's budget program and would lapse on
over twelve times as much as the $90 million authorization.
June 30, 1976.
House Action: Disapproved rescission.
House Action: Disapproved rescission
Committee Recommendation:
Committee Recommendation: The Committee recommends disap-
The Committee recommends concurrence with the House action
proval of rescinding $25,723,000 in contract authority for forest
in disapproving the rescission for the National Scenic and Recre-
roads and trails available for fiscal 1976 under the Federal-Aid
ational Highway (The Great River Road).
Highway Act until the program level is fixed by Congress in the
The Committee also agrees with the House that more informa-
pending appropriation bill for the Department of the Interior
tion is needed concerning the specific plans of the ten states in-
and related agencies. This concurs in the action of the House,
volved in this program. The Committee would be receptive to a
which has approved a program expansion with its passage of H.R.
deferral message for such purpose but would not intend that this
8773. In addition, the Committee has learned that total estimated
deferral be used as a precedent for similar action in other, unre-
budgetary resources for this program may have to be revised
lated programs.
downward as a result of a reduction in National Forest receipts.
ACCESS HIGHWAY TO PUBLIC RECREATION AREAS ON CERTAIN LAKES
1 Original estimate of 10 percent of National Forest receipts available under Public Law
93-87 submitted in President's fiscal year 1976 budget request. More recent estimates place
Rescission No.: R76-2
this closer to $36,000,000.
Date Proposed: July 1, 1975
(8)
Available Budgetary Resources-New BA : $25,000,000;
Other BA : $
Amount of Proposed Rescissions : $25,000,000
Presidential Rationale for Proposed Rescissions: "This is a special
interest program as opposed to a program national in scope."
Committee Recommendation: This program is authorized by Section
115(a) of the Federal-Aid Highway Act Amendments of 1974.
Both the House and Senate, in the Department of Transporta-
tion and Related Agencies Appropriation Bill for Fiscal 1976
and the transition period, have included a direct appropriation
of $10,000,000 for this program and included language in the bill
rescinding the contract authority for it. Thus, no further action
is required at this time.
(9)
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
VIEWS OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET
CONSOLIDATED FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER
The Senate Committee on the Budget, to which was referred a bill
(H.R. 9600), to rescind certain budget authority recommended in the
CONSTRUCTION-FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER
Message of the President of July 26, 1975 (H. Doc. 94-225), trans-
mitted pursuant to the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Con-
Rescission No.: R76-3
Date Proposed: July 1, 1975
trol Act of 1974, having considered the same, reports as follows.
Available Budgetary Resources-New BA $
The matter contained in H.R. 9600, rescission request R75-6, does
Other BA : $40,000,000
;
not appear to have significant macroeconomic effects, nor does it sig-
nificantly affect national priorities. The Committee therefore has no
Amount of Proposed Rescission. $8,665,000
recommendation on this rescission request.
Presidential Rationale for Proposed Rescission: Prior year funding of
The Committee notes with concern the suggestion contained in the
$47,713,000 has been appropriated for construction of the Train-
report of the House of Representatives which accompanied this bill
ing Center at Beltsville, Md. It was subsequently decided to use
in the House that the House Appropriations Committee "would be
the former Glynco Naval Air Station, Brunswick, Georgia, for
receptive to the consideration of a proposal to temporarily defer the
this purpose. The Second Supplemental Appropriations Bill,
funding" for the National Scenic and Recreation Highway, rescission
1975, included a limitation of $30,000,000 to be used for modifica-
of the budget authority for which was contained in R76-1, submitted
tion of the facility and necessary transition expenses. Obligations
by the President on July 1, 1975 (H. Rept. No. 94-496, 94th Cong., 1st
for planning of the proposed Beltsville facility totaled $7,713,000
Sess., p. 8.) Pursuant to this request the President, on September 24,
and an additional $1,335,000 will be required for close-out activi-
1975, submitted a new impoundment (D76-55) of the budget authority
ties. The remaining $8,665,000 is available for rescission.
involved in R76-1, citing as his authority Section 1013 of the Im-
House Action: Disapproved rescission
poundment Control Act.
Pursuant to the Order of the Senate of January 30, 1975, establish-
Committee Recommendation:
ing Senate procedures regarding impoundment matters, the Senate
The Committee recommends concurrence with the House bill
Budget Committee's responsibility, in addition to the macroeconomic
that the proposed rescission of $8,665,000 for construction of the
implications and impact on priorities of any impoundment, includes
Consolidated Federal Law Enforcement Training Center at the
"the legality of the President's use of the deferral and rescission
former Glynco Naval Air Station, Brunswick, Georgia be denied.
mechanism under Title X." The Budget Committee believes a Con-
As the first class of trainees entered the Glynco facility in
gressional committee's request for further impoundment of funds after
September 1975, the Committee is concerned that the total funds
the elapse of the 45-day statutory period provided for in the case of
required for conversion of the facility may not be fully definitized.
rescission requests should be viewed very narrowly. In no case should
Construction 1976. activity is scheduled to commence during spring
it be construed either (i) as a precedent for unilateral Administration
action in the case of future impoundment requests upon which the
The Committee will reconsider rescission of these funds when
statutory period lapses, or (ii) as a precedent for any such impound-
more definite information is available.
ment, even where such Congressional committee request exists, unless
separate statutory authority outside Title X exists to justify such
(10)
further impoundment. The Committee thus rejects the legal basis
asserted in Deferral Number 76-55 as the authority for that
impoundment.
In this case, however, where the House Appropriations Committee
desires more time to consider the matter contained in R76-1, prior to
the obligation of the budget authority involved therein, it appears
that the Antideficiency Act could be viewed as a basis for such further
impoundment. Under these circumstances, the further impoundment
which has been made could reasonably cite the Antideficiency Act as
authority for that impoundment in a report to Congress required by
(11)
12
Section 1013 of Title x of the Congressional Budget and Impound-
ment Control Act.
The Committee believes that Congress and the President are equally
bound to observe the provisions of Title X. Those provisions do not
make allowance for continuing an impoundment beyond the statutory
period prescribed by Section 1012 when that impoundment has orig-
inally been submitted in the form of a rescission request. Should
further impoundment be desired by the Administration or the Con-
gress, specific statutory authority aside from the provisions of Title X
must exist to warrant such further impoundment. It would be in error
for the Congress and illegal for the President to request or accede to
further impoundment in any other case.
H. R. 9600
Minety-fourth Congress of the United States of America
AT THE FIRST SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, the fourteenth day of January,
one thousand nine hundred and seventy-five
An Act
To rescind certain budget authority recommended in the message of the
President of July 26, 1975 (H. Doc. 94-225), transmitted pursuant to the
Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following
rescissions of budget authority contained in the message of the Presi-
dent of July 26, 1975 (H. Doc. 94-225), are made pursuant to the
Impoundment Control Act of 1974, namely:
DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR
BUREAU OF MINES
HELIUM FUND
Contract authority under this head provided by Public Law 87-122
for the fiscal year 1976 is rescinded in the amount of $47,500,000.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.
October 3, 1975
Dear Mr. Director:
The following bills were received at the White
House on October 3rd:
S. 2230
S. 2375
H.R. 9600
Please let the President have reports and
recommendations as to the approval of these
bills as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Robert D. Linder
Chief Executive Clerk
The Honorable James T. Lynn
Director
Office of Management and Budget
Washington, D. - C