Foreign Affairs Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO): Background and Current Issues

Foreign Affairs Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO): Background and Current Issues

November 19, 2014
Foreign Affairs Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO):
Background and Current Issues
addition to country-specific uses, Congress also
Some Members of Congress are examining foreign affairs
appropriated funds for the Global Security Contingency
funding designated as Overseas Contingency Operations
Fund. Congress included limited transfer authority between
(OCO) because of its possible use for the overseas Ebola
OCO accounts subject to regular notification requirements.
crisis, efforts to combat the Islamic State (IS), and other
budgetary reasons. Funds that are designated as emergency
In the FY2013 full-year continuing appropriations (P.L.
or OCO are effectively exempt from the spending limits
113-6, Div. F, Title VII, Sec. 1707-1708), Congress did not
established by the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-
specify additional OCO-recipient countries except for
25, BCA). Some Members have suggested that this
Jordan. Congress did provide limited transfer authority of
exemption provides agencies with additional budget
OCO funds, subject to regular notification procedures.
cushioning and flexibility, allowing their overall funding to
exceed the spending caps.
Figure1. Overseas Contingency Operations,
FY2012-FY2015
Within the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and
Related Programs appropriations, FY2014 OCO funds were
$6.5 billion, or 13% of the total foreign affairs funding that
year. The amended FY2015 OCO request for $7.8 billion
represents about 15% of the total foreign affairs request for
FY2015. The current OCO level, as provided by the
temporary FY2015 continuing resolution (P.L. 113-164,
CR), remains at the FY2014 rate for operations through
December 11, 2014. It also continues multiyear spending,
as well as broad transfer authorities, making its use
somewhat flexible. Any further action on the FY2015
budget during the lame duck session may affect OCO levels
for FY2015.
Background

The foreign affairs agencies began requesting OCO funding
Source: Department of State Congressional Budget Justifications,
in FY2012, distinguishing between what is referred to as
FY2014, FY2015, and amendedFY2015 Administration request of June
enduring (ongoing costs) versus extraordinary, temporary
27, 2014. The totals enacted are net rescissions.
costs of State and USAID in the frontline states of Iraq,
Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Many view this approach as
For FY2014 (P.L. 113-76, Title VIII), Congress provided
similar to the annual emergency supplemental
four accounts with no-year (available until expended) OCO
appropriations to support the Global War on Terrorism
funds, but made most foreign affairs OCO funds available
(GWOT) in the frontline states during the George W. Bush
for two years—or until September 30, 2015 (see Table 1).
Administration.
Congress also expanded the terms of transfer authority,
providing greater flexibility among certain accounts. It also
Congress, having provided OCO funds for the Department
authorizes that transfers from those accounts be available to
of Defense (DOD) a year earlier, adopted this approach for
International Disaster Assistance (IDA) and Migration and
foreign affairs, although it never permanently defined its
Refugee Assistance (MRA), subject to certain dollar
uses in statute. Since 2012, Congress has appropriated more
amounts or percentages, and regular notification
OCO funds than were requested each year and authorized
its use in additional countries (see Figure 1). In contrast,
procedures. FY2014 OCO-funded activities were in Iraq,
President Obama first sought OCO funds for a country
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Jordan, Lebanon, the Central
other than the three frontline states in the FY2015 request
African Republic, and Somalia.
when he requested OCO funds for Syria.
For FY2015, the current CR continues foreign affairs OCO
For the first foreign affairs OCO appropriation, Congress
funding at the FY2014 rate for operations, $800 million on
provided FY2012 OCO funds (P.L. 112-74, Title VIII) for a
an annualized basis below the FY2015 OCO request. It also
wide range of recipients beyond the three frontline states,
continues the expanded FY2014 terms of transfer authority
including Yemen, Somalia, Kenya, and the Philippines. In
and the multiyear availability of most funds.
www.crs.gov | 7-5700

Foreign Affairs Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO): Background and Current Issues
Current Funding and Issues
Foreign aid enduring appropriations being used to help
Ebola-stricken countries, thus far, include IDA and the
OCO funding levels for FY2014 (and continuing into
Global Health (GHP) account within State-Foreign
FY2015 by the CR) are as follows:
Operations appropriations, and Title II of Food for Peace
within the Agriculture Appropriations.
Table1. Current OCO Funding Levels ($ million)
Funds available until September 30, 2015
Some lawmakers are looking into the possibility of using an
expanded OCO or a portion of the $924.2 million of
Diplomatic and Consular Programs (D&CP)
1,391.1
OCO/IDA funds and the nearly $1.3 billion of OCO/MRA
funds, or transfer authority for U.S. overseas Ebola
Office of Inspector General (OIG)
49.7
response, rather than a large emergency supplemental. The
CR continues the FY2014 appropriations and extends Sec.
Educational and Cultural Exchange Programs
8.6
8003 authority to transfer OCO funds from ESF, INCLE,
NADR, PKO, and FMF into IDA and MRA only for
International Broadcasting Operations
4.4
unanticipated contingencies, subject to regular notification.
Up to 15% of these accounts can be transferred and only if
United States Institute of Peace (USIP)
6.0
the recipient account is not increased by more than 25%.
Recently, the four congressional defense committees
USAID’s Operating Expenses (OE)
81.0
permitted a reprogramming of DOD’s OCO-designated
funds for its Ebola-related activities, so a precedent to use
Office of Inspector General
10.0
OCO for a non-GWOT-related activity exists.
Transition Initiatives (TI)
9.4
OCO Amendment for IS?
Complex Crises Fund (CCF)
20.0
On November 10, the Obama Administration submitted
Economic Support Fund (ESF)
1,656.2
amendments to the FY2015 OCO request for both DOD ($5
billion) and the Department of State ($520 million) to
International Narcotics Control and Law
344.4
counter IS. The amendments would be in addition to the
Enforcement (INCLE):
$58.6 billion for DOD and $7.3 billion for State, thus
making the total FY2015 OCO request $71.4 billion, of
Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining,
70.0
which $7.8 billion would fund foreign affairs accounts:
and Related Programs (NADR)
D&CP, ESF, FMF, PKO, IDA, and International
Broadcasting. If Congress uses transfer authority for State
Peacekeeping Operations (PKO)
200.0
to use OCO for Ebola efforts, increasing OCO to combat IS
may also be necessary.
Foreign Military Financing (FMF)
530.0
OCO and Spending Limit Implications
Funds available until expended
Through FY2021, the BCA imposes limits on discretionary
Conflict Stabilization Operations (CSO)
8.5
spending and provides for adjustments to those limits for
Embassy Security, Construction and
275.0
funds designated as OCO or emergency requirements.
Maintenance (ESCM)
When the House and Senate draft the budget resolutions
and the appropriations subcommittees consider funding for
International Disaster Assistance (IDA)
924.2
DOD and foreign affairs, OCO can be used to provide
funds that are effectively not subject to those spending
Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA)
1,284.4
limits, even if the funds have only a tangential relationship
to the war on terrorism. In the FY2015 budget process, for
One-year funding
example, some questioned the Senate’s increased use of
OCO funds over the previous fiscal year, asserting it was
Contributions to International Organizations
74.4
done to free up discretionary funding for other agency
(CIO)
budgets and still meet the FY2015 limit of $1.014 trillion.
Source: Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2015 (P.L. 113-164),
More Information
and Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014, Div. K, Title VII .
OCO for Aid to Ebola-Stricken Countries?
For more information on the foreign affairs budget, see
CRS Report R43569, State, Foreign Operations, and
Related Programs: FY2015 Budget and Appropriations.
On November 5, 2014, the Administration requested a total
of $6.2 billion in a comprehensive emergency supplemental
Susan B. Epstein, sepstein@crs.loc.gov, 7-6678
package to address the Ebola crisis. Of that, nearly $3
billion would be for foreign affairs accounts within the
IF00063
State, Foreign Operations appropriations.
www.crs.gov | 7-5700

Document Outline

Background

Current Funding and Issues

OCO for Aid to Ebola-Stricken Countries?

OCO Amendment for IS?

OCO and Spending Limit Implications

More Information