AUTHORITY OF THE PRESIDENT

SEC. 11. In addition to powers and authority otherwise conferred upon him by this Act or other law, the President may take such action, prescribe such procedures, and promulgate such rules as may be necessary or appropriate to assure that this Act is applied by all Federal agencies in a consistent manner and in accordance with its purposes. He may, for this purpose, require that Federal agencies adopt or prescribe procedures that will assure that applicants for assistance to projects under this Act make appropriate efforts (1) to secure the views and recommendations of non-Federal agencies that may be significantly affected by such projects, including units of general government, and (2) to resolve questions of common interest to those agencies prior to submission of any application. The President shall also, from time to time, make reports to the Congress on actions taken under this Act and make such recommendations for additional legislative action as he may deem appropriate, including recommendations for the consolidation, simplification, and coordination of Federal assistance programs.

SEC. 12. As used in this Act

DEFINITIONS

(1) "Federal assistance programs" are programs that provide assistance through grant or contractual arrangements, and include technical assistance programs or programs providing assistance in the form of loans, loan guarantees or insurance.

(2) "Applicant" includes one or more State or local governments or other public or private agencies or organizations acting separately or together in seeking assistance with respect to a single project.

(3) "Project" includes any undertaking, however characterized and whether of a temporary or continuing nature, which includes components proposed or approved for assistance under more than one Federal program, or one or more Federal and one or more State programs, if each of those components contributes materially to the accomplishment of a single purpose or closely related purposes. (4) "Federal agency" includes any agency in the executive branch of the Government.

(5) "State" means any of the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa.

EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXPIRATION

SEC. 13. This Act shall become effective one hundred and twenty days following the date of enactment and shall expire three years after it becomes effective, but its expiration shall not affect the administration of projects previously approved.

S. 2981-INTRODUCTION OF BILL TO EXPEDITE PROCEDURES FOR CERTAIN FEDERAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS (FEBRUARY 16, 1968)

Mr. MCCLELLAN. Mr. President, I introduce, by request, a bill to provide temporary authority for expediting procedures for consideration and approval of projects drawing upon more than one Federal assistance program, to simplify requirements for the operation of those projects, and for other purposes.

This bill was drafted by the Bureau of the Budget and submitted to the President of the Senate for introduction, in order that the objectives enumerated in the President's message of March 17, 1967, on the quality of American Government may be fulfilled. The President of the United States recommended that legislation be enacted to permit "Federal agencies to combine related grants into a single financial package, thus simplifying the financial and administrative procedures— without disturbing, however, the separate authorization, appropriations, and substantive requirements for each grant-in-aid program.”

The purpose of the proposed legislation is to remove or simplify certain administrative and technical impediments which hamper or prevent the consideration, processing, approval and administration of projects which draw upon resources available from more than one Federal agency, program or appropriation. This bill would enable the State and local governments and other public or private agencies to use Federal financial assistance under two or more programs in support of multiple-purpose projects. Under this bill

Federal agency heads would be authorized to establish uniform requirements of certain provisions of law so that jointly funded projects would not have to be subject to conflicting rules and regulations;

In appropriate cases, Federal agencies would have authority to delegate to other agencies power to approve portions of projects in their behalf;

Federal agency heads could establish joint management funds in their agencies to finance multiple-purpose projects drawing upon appropriations from several different accounts;

The President would prescribe appropriate regulations for, and approve agency delegations of power and functions under this act. He would make reports to the Congress on action taken, and make recommendations for additional legislative action, including proposals for consolidation, simplification or coordination of grant programs.

The Joint Funding Simplification Act of 1948, would not, except as specifically provided, affect substantive provisions of law relating to Federal assistance programs but would provide a legal basis for consolidating some of the financial procedures under centralized direction and control.

S. 2981, JOINT FUNDING SIMPLIFICATION ACT OF 1968 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

In his March 17, 1967, message on the Quality of American Government, the President instructed the Director of the Bureau of the Budget to develop a legislative proposal that would provide for the simplification of Federal grant-inaid programs. This statement constitutes a brief summary of the problem and an outline of the proposal that has been developed in response to the President's directive.

PROBLEM

A number of Federal assistance programs which finance different activities could be brought together in a single project to support similar or directly related purposes. Such combinations of related programs would encourage a comprehensive approach to certain problems and enable State and local governments and other grantees to use Federal assistance more effectively and efficiently. (Attached are several examples of projects which are being, or might be, jointly financed.)

However, existing laws and regulations often make these combinations somewhat difficult to "package" and administer. Each Federal grant program may have different requirements in such matters as application forms, accounting procedures, advisory panels, reporting dates, etc. Further, the grantees often must work with several Federal agencies (or constituent elements of a single agency )each with its own distinct administrative practices. (Attached is an example of a jointly funded multipurpose neighborhood center which illustrates some of the complexities involved.)

The purpose of this proposal is to remove or simplify certain administrative and technical impediments which hamper or prevent the consideration, processing, approval and administration of projects which draw upon resources available from more than one Federal agency, program or appropriation.

PROPOSAL

The Joint Funding Simplification Act of 1968 would achieve this objective by (1) authorizing the removal or modification of certain statutory requirements; (2) authorizing agency heads to delegate the approval and administration of Federal assistance programs to other agencies; (3) providing for a special fund in each agency to finance joint projects; (4) describing the actions which Federal agency heads should take to further joint projects; and (5) authorizing the President to establish standards and procedures to implement the Act. (Except as specifically provided, the Act would not change substantive provisions of law relating to Federal assistance programs such as eligibility criteria, maintenance of effort, matching ratios, authorization levels, program availability, etc. Such questions will be the focus of a later study.)

WAIVER

Federal agency heads would be authorized to waive or modify certain technical and administrative statutory provisions with respect to joint projects, e.g.. re

quirements relating to reporting and auditing, merit personnel systems (under certain conditions), the timing of Federal payments, etc. Agency heads could also waive the requirement that a single public agency be designated or utilized to administer a specific program when that program was part of a joint project but only with the agreement of the public agencies concerned. Such waivers would have to be consistent with applicable State or local law and with the objectives of the program involved.

DELEGATION

With the approval of the President, Federal agency heads would be authorized to delegate to other agencies powers or functions relating to the approval of programs of their agencies which were component parts of a joint project if such delegation was necessary to accomplish the purposes of the Act. Such delegations would have to be exercised in full conformity with applicable statutory provisions. Authority to supervise the administration of projects could also be delegated.

FUNDING

Federal agency heads would be authorized to establish joint management funds to finance joint projects.

AGENCY ACTIONS

The head of each Federal agency would be responsible for taking actions to facilitate joint funding and to expedite the processing of applications for joint projects. Such actions might include development of common application forms, establishment of common administrative rules, designation of "project managers" in one agency to supervise joint projects, etc. (The possible administrative procedures are developed in more detail below.)

PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORITY

The President would be authorized to (a) approve the agency delegation of powers and functions noted above; (b) prescribe regulations, procedures and rules to assure that Federal agencies apply the provisions of this Act in a uniform manner; and (c) require that Federal agencies adopt procedures which assure that applicants for joint projects under this Act make reasonable efforts to secure the views and recommendations of agencies that may be significantly affected by the project, including units of general local government to the fullest extent appropriate.

In summary, this proposal would enable Federal agencies and grantees more readily to "package" and administer a project whose constituent elements were funded under different assistance programs and to operate it as a single, integrated project with common requirements, funding and procedures.

PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE OPERATION

1. President.-As noted above, the proposed legislation would grant the President broad authority to make rules and regulations for its implementation. Those rules and regulations might deal, for example, with the format and content of application forms for joint funding, the processing of such forms, procedures for determining lead-agency or project-manager assignments, conditions under which various waivers of statutory provisions would occur, and the manner in which joint funds will be obligated and accounted for. There would probably also have to be a Presidential effort to bring agency rules, regulations and procedures into line with the needs of the joint funding process.

The President would establish methods and procedures by which the representatives of the major grant-in-aid agencies and the Bureau of the Budget would assist him in carrying out his regulatory functions. The agencies would be expected to work cooperatively to harmonize their regulations, develop procedures for disseminating information about the joint funding approach and consider problems that develop in implementation of the concept.

2. Agencies. Each agency will have to develop certain new rules and regulations, or modify its existing rules and regulations as necessary to facilitate the joint funding concept. Its regulations will also have to be in harmony with those issued by the President.

As experience is gained and if patterns of applications for certain types of joint funding emerge, it is expected that agencies will enter into agreements involving specific joint application forms, the processing of those forms, lead-agency or

project-manager assignments and possible delegations of approval authority and allocations of funds. If possible, typical grant packages will be identified, and certain highly desirable ones may be given priority treatment.

3. Grant recipients.-Under the proposal, grantees will fall into two broad categories: (a) any eligible grantee will be able to apply for joint funding of any or all grants for which he is otherwise eligible; and (b) the head of a unit of general government (e.g., a governor, mayor, or county chief executive) will be able to apply for joint funding of any or all grants for which the agencies and the unit of general government under his jurisdiction are eligible.

The grantee would be faced with several possibilities once he determines what sort of a joint funding proposal he wishes to make: (a) in the simplest situation, in which his proposal involves only grants from one Federal agency for which he is directly eligible, the grantee would simply apply to, and deal with that agency; (b) if his proposal involves grants from more than one Federal agency but only grants for which he is directly eligible, the grantee would probably apply initially to one of those agencies pursuant to instructions and regulations as to which agency had the lead role in processing the particular type of proposal; and (c) if his proposal involves grants from Federal agencies for which he is both directly and indirectly eligible (e.g., if a mayor's proposal involves both direct grants to his city and grants which are made to the State and then passed on by the State), the grantee would have to apply not only to the Federal lead agency but to the State or other jurisdiction involved. In any case (except as expressly provided otherwise in the bill) the proposal would have to meet the substantive requirements of each one of the grants involved in the package. That is, the planning, eligibility, and matching requirements of each one of the component grants in the package would have to be observed. In addition, the proposal would have to provide for separate accounting for construction and nonconstruction components. However, it could involve the waiver of certain technical and administrative provisions as described in the bill.

Under the draft bill it is also contemplated that a combined application by two or more eligible grantees could be made. Thus, a State having a direct federallyfunded community project might combine with a community also applying separately for a Federal grant in a related area for a multigrant project to be jointly funded by the Federal Government. Similarly, a county and a city might submit a combined project application for joint funding.

At the Federal level, several alternatives for handling applications for joint funding are possible. First, the agency receiving the application may simply send copies to the other agencies involved or to the various program units within its own jurisdiction for processing, approval and granting of necessary waivers with an effort to coordinate approval of the overall proposal. Second, pursuant to interagency agreements, the agency might establish a project manager for certain types of proposals who would play an active role in coordinating the processing of the proposal. Third, again pursuant to interagency agreements, the agency might have allocated to it certain funds from other agencies and be delegated the authority to obligate those funds for use in certain joint funding proposals.

The State desires to acquire and develop a historical site and the immediately surrounding property for a recreation project in a metropolitan area. It has decided to apply for the following Federal grants-in-aid which could be elements of the project:

1. A grant for acquisition and rehabilitation of a historically significant building, under the Historic Properties Preservation Act of 1966 (P.L. 89-665). The Federal share may be up to 50%, providing the project is included in an approved State plan for historic preservation, and is coordinated with the State outdoor recreation plan. The grant application is made to the National Park Service of the Department of the Interior. The project grant is approved within an annual allotment made to the State by the Secretary of Interior.

2. A grant for acquisition of surrounding property for park purposes, under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (P.L. 88-578). The Federal share may be up to 50%, providing the project is included in the approved State plan

for outdoor recreation. The grant application must be reviewed and commented upon by a metropolitan review agency, pursuant to Title II of the Demonstration Cities Act. The grant application is made to the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation of the Department of the Interior. The project grant is made within an annual allotment made to the State by the Secretary of Interior.

3. A metropolitan development supplemental grant to increase the Federal share of the park land acquisition element by 20% under Title II of the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966 (P.L. 89-754). This will increase the Federal share in item (2) to 70%. The supplemental grant may be obtained from the Land and Development Facilities Administration of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, provided that the initial park land acquisition proposal is found to contribute significantly to the planned development of the metropolitan area by the metropolitan review agency and HUD. The supplemental grant is a project grant.

4. A grant for urban beautification of the grounds of the project under the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965 (P.L. 89-117). The Federal share may be up to 50% of the costs of beautification. The grant application must be submitted for review and comment to the designated metropolitan review agency. The application is made to the Land and Development Facilities Administration of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. It is a project grant, executed as a contract between the grantee and HUD.

5. A grant for landscaping the Federal-aid highway right-of-way adjacent to the overall project. It is a project grant financed from the three percent of Federalaid highway funds allotted to the State annually which is available for landscaping purposes. The grant application is made to the Bureau of Public Roads of the Department of Transportation. The Federal share is 100%. A continuing cooperative comprehensive transportation planning process is required in any metropolitan area in which Federal-aid highway funds are expended.

Under the current legislative and administrative regulations, the applications process for the recreation project would look like this:

The hypothetical recreation project application process has

1. Four bureaus in three Federal agencies administering five grant programs.

2. Five separate grant appropriations, obligations, and five separate accounting requirements.

3. Five separate applications (two straight project grants, and three grants which are approved within annual State allotments by the relevant Federal agency).

4. Two State agencies as separate grantees.