News from the WRD Program Office, no. 19 To: "A - Division Chief and Staff", "B - Branch Chiefs and Offices", "DC - All District Chiefs" cc: "Joanne C Taylor, Secretary (Typing), Reston, VA" , "Janet N Arneson, Secretary (Typing), Reston, VA" , "Wendy E Norton, Program Analyst, Reston, VA" , jmcneal@usgs.gov, tsaunder@usgs.gov, "Marianne C Guffanti, , Reston, VA" Subject: News from the WRD Program Office, no. 19 Date: Mon, 04 Dec 1995 18:16:00 -0500 From: "James G Peters, Acting Program Officer, Reston, VA" We're 2 months into the new fiscal year with six of the 13 appropriation bills still not approved. No one here seems to know if this some sort of dubious record, but there's no doubt it's highly unusual. Among the six that have not gone to the President yet is our very own Interior bill. It has been twice rejected by the House; the first time by nearly 150 votes, the second time by less than 50. It is likely that the bill will be introduced for a third time before the December 15th deadline for the current Continuing Resolution (CR); perhaps this week. But whether it passes and whether it is signed by the President by the 15th is still problematic. It would not be surprising for Interior to need another CR to fund us past the 15th. And of course, it is possible (though not considered probable) that the Congress and the President will not enact another CR immediately, producing another partial shutdown. I see great opportunities for "bookies" in this year's budget process. Last week, the Washington Post reported that the differences between the President and Congress on the 13 appropriation bills should be called a "skirmish" and indicated that the "real battle" will come over the differences on the reconciliation bill - differences that deal with much larger budget consequences resulting from taxes and entitlement programs and the plan to balance the budget in 7 years (please pardon the run-on sentence). There is no automatic linkage between the appropriation process and the reconciliation process. But many in Congress feel that they can use the appropriation bills as leverage to enforce their goals of eliminating the deficit in 7 years. So the delays in passing appropriation bills (and the resulting need for CR's) might continue well into 1996. Our current CR allows us to spend at our FY95 rate. You may recall that the only change between WRD's FY95 budget and the one agreed to by the conference committee for FY96 is the $5.3M increase in the NAWQA program. The CR has no consequences for reimbursable funds. So other than NAWQA, our programs should be operating fairly normally, but with a bit of caution about the future. On another note, the land management support issue is still alive and well. Last week Wendy compiled information from our Program Managers in Reston (with valuable assistance from some district folks). The numbers we came up with are: $10.5M of our Federal funds and $11.8M of OFA funds were used by WRD in FY95 to provide direct support to other DOI bureau's and the Forest Service. Admittedly, the Federal funding numbers are subjective. But we tried to be conservative, assuming that if asked, the other bureaus would agree with our "direct support" criteria. What interests me is that the Federal funds and the OFA funds are not that far apart; we are supporting other bureaus' work with just about as much of our Federal funds as with their funds. At any rate, Gordie wants the exercise expanded to include support for '93, '94, and '96. And although we will do all we can here in Reston to address this new request, I'm sure that some of the Program Managers will again have to go to selected district offices for help. Based on the comments we've received from many of you already, I'm guessing this topic will generate some lively discussion at our next Senior Staff meeting. That's it for now. Hang loose.......