Mr. Chair, first of all, I would like to confirm that this is not a request for incremental funding. That is indeed the case. The agency, up until about a year and a half to two years ago, had one operating vote, which was operating vote number 1; but in recognition of the need to be transparent in terms of our capital expenditures, we established a separate vote, vote 5, a capital vote, similar to what other departments and agencies have. As a result of that, we at that point in time estimated how much that capital should have been, and our estimate was that it should have been approximately $203 million.
Over time, we recognized that this was something new to the agency. We understood that we needed to refine that number moving forward, because it was a significant estimate. As a result of, I'll say, an overestimation of the capital portion that needs to be accounted for, from an accounting perspective, in large IT contracts, we are now bringing further refinement to what we believe our capital vote should be going forward.
This is an opportunity for us to move $115 million from our capital vote, where it should really not have been, to properly reflect it in our operating vote, in order for us to have sufficient funding to cover expenditures such as salaries and other operating expenditures. It is not an incremental request. It really is a technical realignment between, I'm going to say, votes.