Starting a Federal Regional Commission or Authority

Starting a Federal Regional Commission or Authority

Updated March 7, 2023
Starting a Federal Regional Commission or Authority
The federal regional commissions and authorities are seven
broadly replicated in the other commissions. However, this
congressionally-chartered, federal-state partnerships that
basic structure has been adapted to the circumstances and
were developed to address economic distress in targeted
needs of the region in question.
geographic regions. With congressional authorization, new
regional commissions could be created in areas of the
Structural Exceptions
country not currently serviced. This In Focus addresses past
While the prevailing structure is broadly apparent among
and anticipated future congressional interest into the issues
the federal regional commissions, exceptions and certain
and processes involved in starting a federal regional
novelties are also evident. For example, the ARC’s
commission based on existing models.
authorizing statute requires state governors to serve as ARC
members and has no allowance for governors to designate a
Current Commissions and Authorities
representative (although an alternate may be allowed in
As of March 2023, eight federal regional commissions have
extenuating circumstances). By contrast, the other active
been authorized by Congress. (Although some are
regional commissions allow for the member state governors
designated as “authorities,” this In Focus will refer to all of
to appoint designated representatives to serve in their stead.
them collectively as “commissions.”) Five are currently
active, have received recent appropriations, and have a
As a single-state commission, the Denali Commission
Senate-confirmed federal co-chair (or equivalent) in place:
features several structural exceptions. Alongside the federal
the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC); the Delta
co-chair, the commission is comprised of the state governor
Regional Authority (DRA); the Denali Commission; the
(who is state co-chair) as well as five other members: the
Northern Border Regional Commission (NBRC); and the
University of Alaska president; the Alaska Municipal
Southeast Crescent Regional Commission (SCRC). A sixth
League president; the Alaska Federation of Natives
commission, the Southwest Border Regional Commission
president; the Alaska State AFL-CIO president; and the
(SBRC) is authorized but has yet to convene its members or
Associated General Contractors of Alaska president. The
undertake core planning or investment activities. Two
Denali Commission’s federal co-chair is appointed by the
commissions were authorized but are inactive: the Northern
Secretary of Commerce, while the federal co-chairs of other
Great Plains Regional Authority (NGPRA) and the Great
commissions are appointed by the President and require
Lakes Authority (GLA). The active commissions engage in
confirmation by the Senate. The Denali Commission’s
economic development activities in their service areas with
inclusion of non-gubernatorial membership is also a feature
funding from annual congressional appropriations.
of the multi-state Northern Great Plains Regional Authority.
Though inactive, the NGPRA consisted of the federal co-
Structural Features
chair, the state governors, as well as a Native American
tribal co-chair. The NGPRA also used a 501(c)(3)
Common Structures
organization as a resource for implementation.
While the authorized federal regional commissions have
individual distinguishing features, they all include a
A new federal regional commission may share the existing
structure broadly modeled after the Appalachian Regional
commissions’ basic structures while including features to
Commission, which was established by Congress in 1965
represent certain regional economic, social, cultural, or
(40 U.S.C. §§14101-14704). The commission structure is
historical characteristics. Such an approach could also be
comprised of a federal co-chair and the state governors of
adapted to programmatic intent; for example, emphases on
member states or their designated representative (of which
certain industries, types of economic development (such as
one serves as state co-chair). The commission is
infrastructure or workforce development), or other policy
supplemented by professional staff to carry out
priorities, like energy transition or conservation.
organizational activities. While largely considered
independent federal agencies, most commission members
Authorization and Establishment
and staff are not federal employees. The main exception is
Process
the federal co-chair, that co-chair’s alternate, and that co-
chair’s direct staff. However, a commission may adopt
Regional Consensus and Demand
certain federal personnel practices. For example, the ARC
While chartered by Congress, federal regional commissions
pegs its salary grades to the Office of Personnel
are rooted in the states and localities they represent. Prior to
Management’s General Schedule, and former federal
their statutory creation, all federal regional commissions
employees may remain in the federal retirement system.
were preceded by state, local, and/or congressional
expressions of support. The ARC, for example, was
A new federal regional commission may use a similar
founded in response to initiatives from Appalachian
structure to the one established for the ARC, which was
regional governors. Those efforts led to presidential and
https://crsreports.congress.gov

Starting a Federal Regional Commission or Authority
congressional legislation, which resulted in a study
administrative expenses may evince their financial
commission and the eventual creation of the ARC in 1965.
commitment to the endeavor.
All of the federal regional commissions were founded after
long-term consensus-driven efforts in the states and regions
Federal Co-Chair Appointment
to demonstrate both need and demand for their creation.
After appropriations have been secured to begin operations,
the entity’s launch may be stymied by other operational
Legislation and Authorization
factors. The appointment of a federal co-chair, unless
Once the concept for a federal regional commission has
otherwise provided, is essential for a federal regional
gained traction regionally, it may then be the subject of
commission’s operations. For example, the SBRC
congressional hearings or legislation. Such deliberations
consistently received appropriations, but was unable to
may last for years, as the case for the federal regional
begin its operations until a federal co-chair was appointed
commission is gradually established and support is
by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Alternative
cultivated in the relevant committees (e.g., the House
provisions could be enacted to avoid or surmount such an
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, the Senate
issue, such as allowing the federal co-chair to be appointed
Environment and Public Works Committee, and the
by a cabinet official, based on the model of the Denali
respective appropriations committees).
Commission, or to provide for the commission to be able to
convene in the absence of an appointed federal co-chair.
For example, SCRC legislation was first introduced in
1994, and grassroots initiatives pushed the concept forward
Scope and Nature of Activities
until its 2008 authorization. Similarly, the SBRC’s 2008
While appropriations fund the activities for the federal
authorization was preceded by a 1999 executive order, and
regional commissions, the scope and nature of each
subsequent legislation. The NBRC is notable in that it was
commission’s activities may differ. The Denali
proposed only about a year before authorization, but it may
Commission, for example, largely focuses on energy
have benefited from being passed with the SBRC and
storage and infrastructure and special infrastructure
SCRC. Once a critical mass of support is achieved,
protection programs, reflecting the specific needs of its
precedent suggests that the authorizing legislation is likely
service area. The ARC, DRA, and NBRC engage in a
to be included within omnibus legislation, such as the
broader spectrum of economic development activities, but
conventionally quadrennial farm bills—the 2008 farm bill
also feature specialized funding priorities. On example is
authorized the NBRC, the SCRC, and the SBRC. Congress
the ARC’s POWER Initiative, which seeks to address
authorized the GLA in the Consolidated Appropriations
economic dislocation in coal industry-dependent
Act, 2023 (P.L. 117-328).
communities. The ARC, DRA, and NBRC also provide
financial support to local development districts, which are
Appropriations and Funding
multi-county organizations that assess projects and advise
Although the founding legislation may authorize
the commissions on local priorities and issues.
appropriations, actual funding awaits approval as part of an
appropriations bill. A lack of appropriations may prevent
The scope of a commission’s economic development
the entity from beginning operations and any planned
activities are also determined by their statutorily-delineated
activities. In recent years, new federal regional
service areas. These service areas are the primary
commissions have received appropriations in the low
beneficiaries of the commissions’ activities, so only
millions of dollars. The NBRC was authorized for up to $30
organizations based in these areas can receive funding (with
million in annual funding when it was created in FY2008
some minor exceptions). The service areas can only be
(P.L. 110-234), but received appropriations for $1.5 million
modified or amended through legislation. In addition, the
in FY2010 (P.L. 111-85). That number held steady until
active and functioning commissions consider project
FY2014, when it was appropriated $5 million, and
applications based on county-level distress designations.
increased since then to $40 million in FY2023 (P.L. 117-
The ARC designates counties along five ascending classes
328). The Northern Great Plains Regional Authority, which
of distress; the NBRC and SCRC use three; the DRA
is inactive, received an appropriation once for $1.5 million
designates counties as either distressed or not; as does the
in FY2004. The SCRC received annual appropriations for
Denali Commission. Along with other criteria, distress
$250,000 each year from FY2008 through FY2020. This
levels can influence funding decisions, and may also
amount increased to $20 million in FY2023 (P.L. 117-328).
determine grant match levels for certain commissions.
Between FY2021 and FY2023, the SBRC received $9
million in appropriations. The GLA has not received any
Additional Considerations
appropriations.
There is no requirement that a new federal regional
commission follow previous or existing models. However,
While federal appropriations fund all the activities of the
their commonalities provide an institutional blueprint in
federal regional commissions and authorities, it is
statute and in practice. At the same time, the differences in
customary for the federal government and the member
commission charters suggest that new commissions could
states to share administrative expenses. Of the authorized
incorporate structural or programmatic innovations to
federal regional commissions, only the Denali Commission
accomplish particular policy goals. While there are other
is entirely funded by the federal government, although the
options for federal economic development, the federal
State of Alaska does contribute in other ways. For a
regional commissions represent a relatively flexible model
proposed commission, the states’ willingness to share
that integrates federal, state, and local input in service of
regional economic and community development priorities.
https://crsreports.congress.gov

Starting a Federal Regional Commission or Authority

Julie M. Lawhorn, Analyst in Economic Development
Policy
IF11396

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11396 · VERSION 5 · UPDATED