of Representatives (Including Clause 2 of House Rule XI) and E. COMMITTEE ACTION ON REPORTS OF THE Rule X, 4(c)(1)(A), of the rules of the House, imposes the duty upon this committee to receive and examine reports of the Comptroller General referred to it and to make such recommendations to the House as it deems necessary or desirable in connection with the subject matter of the reports. In discharging this responsibility, each report of the Comptroller General received by the committee is studied and analyzed by the staff and referred to the subcommittee of this committee to which has been assigned general jurisdiction over the subject matter involved. The committee has received a total of 19 General Accounting Office Reports to the Congress for processing during the first session of the 103d Congress. After preliminary staff study, these reports were referred to subcommittees of this committee as follows: Legislation and National Security Subcommittee Environment, Energy, and Natural Resources Subcommittee Human Resources and Intergovernmental Relations Subcommittee Information, Justice, Transportation, and Agriculture Subcommittee 0 5823∞ 1 19 The Comptroller General has made 81 special reports to the committee or its subcommittees that are not included in the above fig ures. Furthermore, in implementation of section 236 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, the committee now regularly receives GAO reports that are not addressed to Congress but contain recommendations to heads of the Federal agencies. These are generally reports to the agency heads. The committee also receives from the agency heads their written statements of actions taken with respect to such recommendations, as required by section 236. The committee received a total of 794 such GAO reports to Federal agencies or other committees and Members within the legislative branch. Periodic reports are received from the subcommittees on actions taken with respect to individual reports, and monthly reports are made to the chairman as to reports received. During the session, the committees used the reports to further specific investigations and reviews. In most cases, additional information concerning the findings and recommendations of the Comptroller General was requested and received from the administrative agency involved, as well as from the General Accounting Office. More specific information on the actions taken appears in part two below. Complete files are maintained by the committee on all Comptroller General's reports received. Detailed records are kept showing the subcommittee to which the report is referred, the date of referral, and the subsequent action taken. The committee will review all of the Comptroller General's reports received during the Congress in the light of additional infor 77-123 - 94 - 2 PART TWO. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES I. Matters of Interest, Full Committee A. GENERAL 1. Oversight Plans of the Committees of the U.S. House of Representatives. In adopting the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, the House attempted to improve the congressional function of overseeing Federal programs and agencies by giving the committee a role in coordinating the oversight activities of the other standing committees of the House. From the 93d through 99th Congresses, the following provision appeared in the Rules of the House as clause 2(c) of rule X: At the beginning of each Congress, an appropriate representative of the Committee on Government Operations shall meet with appropriate representatives of each of the other committees of the House to discuss the oversight plans of such committees and to assist in coordinating all of the oversight activities of the House during such Congress. Within 60 days after the Congress convenes, the Committee on Government Operations shall report to the House the results of such meetings and discussions and any recommendations which it may have to assure the most effective coordination of such activities and otherwise achieve the objectives of this clause. For several years the committee has been aware of a number of concerns dealing with the report and its relationship to the oversight process, and in H. Rept. 99-25 it questioned whether the report requirement was duplicative of similar material published by the Committee on House Administration. Accordingly, at the beginning of the 100th Congress, pursuant to a motion by Chairman Brooks, the House amended the rules to eliminate the report requirement embodied as clause 2(c) of rule X. 2. Views and Estimates for Fiscal Year 1994. On March 5, 1993, pursuant to section 301(d) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, as amended by the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, the committee submitted its views and estimates to the Committee on the Budget on matters in the President's fiscal year 1994 budget that were within the committee's jurisdiction including budget authority for the Office of Management and Budget, General Services Administration, and other agencies. 3. Legislation. a. Government Performance and Results Act of 1993; H.R. 826.— On February 4, 1993, the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 was introduced by Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), the ranking minority member of the committee, William F. Clinger, Jr. (R-PA), and the ranking minority member of the Legislation and National Security Subcommittee, Alfred A. McCandless (RCA). H.R. 826 is to provide for the establishment, testing, and evaluation of strategic planning and performance measurement in the Federal Government, and for other purposes. The purpose of H.R. 826 is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Federal programs by establishing a system to set goals for program performance and to measure results. After a series of pilot projects implementing a strategic planning and performance measurement system in volunteer agencies, the requirements of H.R. 826 will go Governmentwide eventually leading to a performance-based budgeting system. Hearings were held on March 23, 1993, by the Legislation and National Security Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations. On May 18, 1993, the Legislation and National Security Subcommittee reported H.R. 826 to the full committee, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. On May 25, 1993, the bill was approved and ordered reported, as amended, to the House by the Committee on Government Operations. H.R. 826, as amended, passed the House under suspension of the rules on May 25, 1993. The bill was sent to the Senate and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs on May 26, 1993. On June 16, 1993, the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee reported S. 20, as amended. The bill passed the Senate, amended, on June 23, 1993, and was received in the House and held at the desk on June 24, 1993. S. 20 passed the House on July 15, 1993, and was signed by the President on August 3, 1993, Public Law 103-62. b. Department of Environmental Protection Act, H.R. 3425.-On March 13, 1990, during the 101st Congress, the Committee on Government Operations reported the Department of Environmental Protection Act of 1990, H.R. 3847. That bipartisan legislation passed by a voice vote in committee and was approved by a vote of 371 to 58 in the House on March 28, 1990. The Senate failed to pass companion legislation during the 101st Congress. In the 102d Congress the Senate adopted separate legislation to make EPA a cabinet department, but the House did not act on a similar measure prior to adjournment. H.R. 3425, the Department of Environmental Protection Act, was introduced on November 3, 1993, by Representatives John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), chairman of the Committee on Government Operations, Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY), author of the Department of the Environment Act of 1993 (H.R. 109), which was referred to the Committee on Government Operations, Representative Mike Synar (DOK), chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment, Energy, and Natural Resources of the Committee on Government Operations, and John Porter (R-IL), together with a bipartisan group of 39 other Members of the House. The bill would redesignate the Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] as the Department of Environmental Protection, and make modest changes to the current internal structure of the EPA along with significant management improvements in the operations of the Department. Twenty years ago, Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970 (84 Stat. 2086) created the EPA by transferring several functions from the Departments of the Interior (Federal Water Quality Administration), Health, Education, and Welfare (National Air Pollution Control Administration and Bureaus of Water Hygiene, Solid Waste Management, and Radiological Health) and Agriculture (pesticides registration). The Agency's first composite budget was $1.3 billion for fiscal year 1971, which reflected a total full-time equivalent [FTE] employment of 5,959 for the new agency. To these transferred functions, Congress added a host of new statutory responsibilities. Thus, EPA's responsibilities have greatly expanded since its 1970 formation although its organizational structure remains essentially the same. The cumulative result of almost continual expansion of responsibilities is that EPA now regulates thousands of toxic and hazardous compounds, in addition to the conventional pollutants originally regulated in 1970. As a result of the growth of its legislative mandates and programs over the last 23 years, EPA's fiscal year 1994 $6.6 billion budget is more than four times greater than its first full year budget, and its 17,000 total FTE employment is three times larger. If EPA held departmental status, its fiscal year 1994 budget of $6.6 billion would rank 12th in size among the 14 Federal departments, exceeding the budgets of the Departments of Commerce and State. EPA's domain now is heavily intertwined with State and local programs, as specifically directed by most environmental laws. From fuel economy ratings, to drinking water standards, to pesticide safety, to clean air, no citizen is untouched by EPA regulatory activities. Due to the increasingly transboundary nature of pollution, EPA's role in international affairs has greatly increased as well. In recent years, EPA has been involved in discussions, negotiations, and policy formulation on stratospheric ozone depletion, hazardous waste export, acid rain control, global climate change, and marine pollution control. Requests from other nations for technical assistance in solving environmental problems are also increasing. Together with the State Department, the EPA Administrator negotiates treaties with foreign governments on ocean dumping, global warming, and many other critical matters. H.R. 3425 redesignates the EPA as the Department of Environmental Protection and sets out the principal officers and principal offices of the new Department. The principal officers of the Department are the Secretary, a Deputy Secretary, 10 Assistant Secretaries, a general counsel, and an inspector general. Besides elevating EPA to the cabinet, the legislation is intended to correct some serious management deficiencies documented by the EPA inspector general, the General Accounting Office, the House Government Operations Committee, and the House Energy and Commerce Committee, the principal EPA authorizing committee, which worked closely with the Committee on Government Op |