[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 132 (Tuesday, August 8, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11845-S11888]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR APPROPRIATIONS, 1996

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 1977) making appropriations for the Department 
     of the Interior and related agencies for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 1996, and for other purposes.

  The Senate proceeded to consider the bill, which had been reported 
from the Committee on Appropriations, with amendments; as follows:
  (The parts of the bill intended to be stricken are shown in boldface 
brackets and the parts of the bill intended to be inserted are shown in 
italic.)
                               H.R. 1977

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Department of 
     the Interior and related agencies for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 1996, and for other purposes, namely:
                  TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                       Bureau of Land Management


                   management of lands and resources

       For expenses necessary for protection, use, improvement, 
     development, disposal, cadastral surveying, classification, 
     acquisition of easements and other interests in lands, and 
     performance of other functions, including maintenance of 
     facilities, as authorized by law, in the management of lands 
     and their resources under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of 
     Land Management, including the general administration of the 
     Bureau [$570,017,000] $565,936,000, to remain available until 
     expended[, of which not more than $599,999 shall be available 
     to the Needles Resources Area for the management of the East 
     Mojave National Scenic Area, as defined by the Bureau of Land 
     Management prior to October 1, 1994, in the California Desert 
     District of the Bureau of Land Management,] and of which 
     $4,000,000 shall be derived from the special receipt account 
     established by section 4 of the Land and Water Conservation 
     Fund Act of 1965, as amended (16 U.S.C. 460l-6a(i)): 
     Provided, That appropriations herein made shall not be 
     available for the destruction of healthy, unadopted, wild 
     horses and burros in the care of the Bureau or its 
     contractors; and in addition, $27,650,000 for Mining Law 
     Administration program operations, to remain available until 
     expended, to be reduced by amounts collected by the Bureau of 
     Land Management and credited to this appropriation from 
     annual mining claim fees so as to result in a final 
     appropriation estimated at not more than [$570,017,000] 
     $565,936,000: Provided further, That in addition to funds 
     otherwise available, and to remain available until expended, 
     not to exceed $5,000,000 from annual mining claim fees shall 
     be credited to this account for the costs of administering 
     the mining claim fee program, and $2,000,000 from 
     communication site rental fees established by the Bureau.


                        wildland fire management

       For necessary expenses for fire use and management, fire 
     preparedness, emergency presuppression, suppression 
     operations, emergency rehabilitation, and renovation or 
     construction of fire facilities in the Department of the 
     Interior, [$235,924,000] $242,159,000, to remain available 
     until expended, of which not to exceed $5,025,000, shall be 
     available for the renovation or construction of fire 
     facilities: Provided, That notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, persons hired pursuant to 43 U.S.C. 1469 
     may be furnished subsistence and lodging without cost from 
     funds available from this appropriation: Provided further, 
     That such funds are also available for repayment of advances 
     to other appropriation accounts from which funds were 
     previously transferred for such purposes: Provided further, 
     That unobligated balances of amounts previously appropriated 
     to the Fire Protection and Emergency Department of the 
     Interior Firefighting Fund may be transferred or merged with 
     this appropriation.


                    central hazardous materials fund

       For expenses necessary for use by the Department of the 
     Interior and any of its component offices and bureaus for the 
     remedial action, including associated activities, of 
     hazardous waste substances, pollutants, or contaminants 
     pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation and Liability Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 9601 et 
     seq.), $10,000,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, sums 
     recovered from or paid by a party in advance of or as 
     reimbursement for remedial action or response activities 
     conducted by the Department pursuant to sections 107 or 
     113(f) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation and Liability Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 9607 or 
     9613(f)), shall be credited to this account and shall be 
     available without further appropriation and shall remain 
     available until expended: Provided further, That such sums 
     recovered from or paid by any party are not limited to 
     monetary payments and may include stocks, bonds or other 
     personal or real property, which may be retained, liquidated, 
     or otherwise disposed of by the Secretary of the Interior and 
     which shall be credited to this account.


                        construction and access

       For acquisition of lands and interests therein, and 
     construction of buildings, recreation facilities, roads, 
     trails, and appurtenant facilities, [$2,515,000] $2,615,000, 
     to remain available until expended.


                       payments in lieu of taxes

       For expenses necessary to implement the Act of October 20, 
     1976, as amended (31 U.S.C. 6901-07), [$111,409,000] 
     $100,000,000, of which not to exceed $400,000 shall be 
     available for administrative expenses.


                            land acquisition

       For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of 
     sections 205, 206, and 318(d) of Public Law 94-579 including 
     administrative expenses and acquisition of lands or waters, 
     or interests therein, [$8,500,000] $10,550,000 to be derived 
     from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, to remain 
     available until expended.


                   oregon and california grant lands

       For expenses necessary for management, protection, and 
     development of resources and for construction, operation, and 
     maintenance of access roads, reforestation, and other 
     improvements on the revested Oregon and California Railroad 
     grant lands, on other Federal lands in the Oregon and 
     California land-grant counties of Oregon, and on adjacent 
     rights-of-way; and acquisition of lands or interests therein 
     including existing connecting roads on or adjacent to such 
     grant lands; [$91,387,000] $95,364,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That 25 per centum of the aggregate 
     of all receipts during the current fiscal year from the 
     revested Oregon and California Railroad grant lands is hereby 
     made a charge against the Oregon and California land-grant 
     fund and shall be transferred to the General Fund in the 
     Treasury in accordance with the provisions of the second 
     paragraph of subsection (b) of title II of the Act of August 
     28, 1937 (50 Stat. 876).


                           range improvements

       For rehabilitation, protection, and acquisition of lands 
     and interests therein, and improvement of Federal rangelands 
     pursuant to section 401 of the Federal Land Policy and 
     Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701), notwithstanding any 
     other Act, sums equal to 50 per centum of all moneys received 
     during the prior fiscal year under sections 3 and 15 of the 
     Taylor Grazing Act (43 U.S.C. 315 et seq.) and the amount 
     designated for range improvements from grazing fees and 
     mineral leasing receipts from Bankhead-Jones lands 
     transferred to the Department of the Interior pursuant to 
     law, but not less than $9,113,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That not to exceed $600,000 

[[Page S 11846]]
     shall be available for administrative expenses.


               service charges, deposits, and forfeitures

       For administrative expenses and other costs related to 
     processing application documents and other authorizations for 
     use and disposal of public lands and resources, for costs of 
     providing copies of official public land documents, for 
     monitoring construction, operation, and termination of 
     facilities in conjunction with use authorizations, and for 
     rehabilitation of damaged property, such amounts as may be 
     collected under sections 209(b), 304(a), 304(b), 305(a), and 
     504(g) of the Act approved October 21, 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701), 
     and sections 101 and 203 of Public Law 93-153, to be 
     immediately available until expended: Provided, That 
     notwithstanding any provision to the contrary of section 
     305(a) of the Act of October 21, 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1735(a)), 
     any moneys that have been or will be received pursuant to 
     that section, whether as a result of forfeiture, compromise, 
     or settlement, if not appropriate for refund pursuant to 
     section 305(c) of that Act (43 U.S.C. 1735(c)), shall be 
     available and may be expended under the authority of this or 
     subsequent appropriations Acts by the Secretary to improve, 
     protect, or rehabilitate any public lands administered 
     through the Bureau of Land Management which have been damaged 
     by the action of a resource developer, purchaser, permittee, 
     or any unauthorized person, without regard to whether all 
     moneys collected from each such forfeiture, compromise, or 
     settlement are used on the exact lands damage to which led to 
     the forfeiture, compromise, or settlement: Provided further, 
     That such moneys are in excess of amounts needed to repair 
     damage to the exact land for which collected.


                       miscellaneous trust funds

       In addition to amounts authorized to be expended under 
     existing law, there is hereby appropriated such amounts as 
     may be contributed under section 307 of the Act of October 
     21, 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701), and such amounts as may be 
     advanced for administrative costs, surveys, appraisals, and 
     costs of making conveyances of omitted lands under section 
     211(b) of that Act, to remain available until expended.


                       administrative provisions

       Appropriations for the Bureau of Land Management shall be 
     available for purchase, erection, and dismantlement of 
     temporary structures, and alteration and maintenance of 
     necessary buildings and appurtenant facilities to which the 
     United States has title; up to $100,000 for payments, at the 
     discretion of the Secretary, for information or evidence 
     concerning violations of laws administered by the Bureau of 
     Land Management; miscellaneous and emergency expenses of 
     enforcement activities authorized or approved by the 
     Secretary and to be accounted for solely on his certificate, 
     not to exceed $10,000: Provided, That notwithstanding 44 
     U.S.C. 501, the Bureau may, under cooperative cost-sharing 
     and partnership arrangements authorized by law, procure 
     printing services from cooperators in connection with 
     jointly-produced publications for which the cooperators share 
     the cost of printing either in cash or in services, and the 
     Bureau determines the cooperator is capable of meeting 
     accepted quality standards.

                United States Fish and Wildlife Service


                          resource management

       For expenses necessary for scientific and economic studies, 
     conservation, management, investigations, protection, and 
     utilization of fishery and wildlife resources, except whales, 
     seals, and sea lions, and for the performance of other 
     authorized functions related to such resources; for the 
     general administration of the United States Fish and Wildlife 
     Service; and for maintenance of the herd of long-horned 
     cattle on the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge; and not less 
     than $1,000,000 for high priority projects within the scope 
     of the approved budget which shall be carried out by the 
     Youth Conservation Corps as authorized by the Act of August 
     13, 1970, as amended by Public Law 93-408, [$498,035,000 
     (less $885,000)] $496,978,000, to remain available for 
     obligation until September 30, 1997, of which $11,557,000 
     shall be available until expended for operation and 
     maintenance of fishery mitigation facilities constructed by 
     the Corps of Engineers under the Lower Snake River 
     Compensation Plan, authorized by the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 2921), to compensate for 
     loss of fishery resources from water development projects on 
     the Lower Snake River: Provided, That unobligated and 
     unexpended balances in the Resource Management account at the 
     end of fiscal year 1995, shall be merged with and made a part 
     of the fiscal year 1996 Resource Management appropriation, 
     and shall remain available for obligation until September 30, 
     1997: Provided further, That no monies appropriated under 
     this Act or any other law shall be used to implement 
     subsections (a), (b), (c), (e), (g), or (i) of section 4 of 
     the Endangered Species Act until such time as legislation 
     reauthorizing the Act is enacted, except that monies 
     appropriated under this Act may be used to delist or 
     reclassify species pursuant to subsections 4(a)(2)(B), 
     4(c)(2)(B)(i), and 4(c)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act.


                              construction

       For construction and acquisition of buildings and other 
     facilities required in the conservation, management, 
     investigation, protection, and utilization of fishery and 
     wildlife resources, and the acquisition of lands and 
     interests therein; [$26,355,000] $38,775,000, to remain 
     available until expended.


                natural resource damage assessment fund

       To conduct natural resource damage assessment activities by 
     the Department of the Interior necessary to carry out the 
     provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 9601, 
     et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33 
     U.S.C. 1251, et seq.), the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (Public 
     Law 101-380), and the Act of July 27, 1990 (Public Law 101-
     337); [$6,019,000] $4,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That sums provided by any party in fiscal 
     year 1996 and thereafter are not limited to monetary payments 
     and may include stocks, bonds or other personal or real 
     property, which may be retained, liquidated or otherwise 
     disposed of by the Secretary and such sums or properties 
     shall be utilized for the restoration of injured resources, 
     and to conduct new damage assessment activities.


                            land acquisition

       For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of the 
     Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, as amended (16 
     U.S.C. 460l-4-11), including administrative expenses, and for 
     acquisition of land or waters, or interest therein, in 
     accordance with statutory authority applicable to the United 
     States Fish and Wildlife Service, [$14,100,000] $32,031,000, 
     to be derived from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, to 
     remain available until expended.


            cooperative endangered species conservation fund

       For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of the 
     Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543), as 
     amended by Public Law 100-478, $8,085,000 for grants to 
     States, to be derived from the Cooperative Endangered Species 
     Conservation Fund, and to remain available until expended.


                     national wildlife refuge fund

       For expenses necessary to implement the Act of October 17, 
     1978 (16 U.S.C. 715s), $10,779,000.

                         rewards and operations

       For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of the 
     African Elephant Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 4201-4203, 4211-
     4213, 4221-4225, 4241-4245, and 1538), $600,000, to remain 
     available until expended.


               north american wetlands conservation fund

       For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of the 
     North American Wetlands Conservation Act, Public Law 101-233, 
     [$4,500,000] $6,750,000, to remain available until expended.

        lahontan valley and pyramid lake fish and wildlife fund

       For carrying out section 206(f) of Public Law 101-618, such 
     sums as have previously been credited or may be credited 
     hereafter to the Lahontan Valley and Pyramid Lake Fish and 
     Wildlife Fund, to be available until expended without further 
     appropriation.
                 rhinoceros and tiger conservation fund

       For deposit to the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Fund, 
     $200,000, to remain available until expended, to be available 
     to carry out the provisions of the Rhinoceros and Tiger 
     Conservation Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-391).

              wildlife conservation and appreciation fund

       For deposit to the Wildlife Conservation and Appreciation 
     Fund, [$998,000] $800,000, to remain available until 
     expended[, to be available for carrying out the Partnerships 
     for Wildlife Act only to the extent such funds are matched as 
     provided in section 7105 of said Act].


                       administrative provisions

       Appropriations and funds available to the United States 
     Fish and Wildlife Service shall be available for purchase of 
     not to exceed [54 passenger] 113 motor vehicles[, none of 
     which are for police-type use]; not to exceed $400,000 for 
     payment, at the discretion of the Secretary, for information, 
     rewards, or evidence concerning violations of laws 
     administered by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 
     and miscellaneous and emergency expenses of enforcement 
     activities, authorized or approved by the Secretary and to be 
     accounted for solely on his certificate; repair of damage to 
     public roads within and adjacent to reservation areas caused 
     by operations of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service; 
     options for the purchase of land at not to exceed $1 for each 
     option; facilities incident to such public recreational uses 
     on conservation areas as are consistent with their primary 
     purpose; and the maintenance and improvement of aquaria, 
     buildings, and other facilities under the jurisdiction of the 
     United States Fish and Wildlife Service and to which the 
     United States has title, and which are utilized pursuant to 
     law in connection with management and investigation of fish 
     and wildlife resources: Provided, That notwithstanding 44 
     U.S.C. 501, the Service may, under cooperative cost sharing 
     and partnership arrangements authorized by law, procure 
     printing services from cooperators in connection with 
     jointly-produced publications for which the cooperators share 
     at least one-half the cost of printing either in cash or 
     services and the Service determines the cooperator is capable 
     of meeting accepted quality standards: Provided further, That 
     the United States Fish and Wildlife Service may accept 
     donated aircraft as replacements for existing aircraft: 
     Provided further, That notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the Secretary of the Interior may not spend any of 

[[Page S 11847]]
     the funds appropriated in this Act for the purchase of lands or 
     interests in lands to be used in the establishment of any new 
     unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System unless the 
     purchase is approved in advance by the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations in compliance with the 
     reprogramming procedures contained in House Report 103-551[: 
     Provided further, That none of the funds made available in 
     this Act may be used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to 
     impede or delay the issuance of a wetlands permit by the U.S. 
     Army Corps of Engineers to the City of Lake Jackson, Texas, 
     for the development of a public golf course west of Buffalo 
     Camp Bayou between the Brazos River and Highway 332]: 
     Provided further, That notwithstanding the Emergency Wetlands 
     Resources Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. 3911), amounts collected 
     from the sale of admissions permits and from fees collected 
     at units of the Fish and Wildlife Service for fiscal year 
     1996 shall be available for use by the Fish and Wildlife 
     Service pursuant to paragraph (c)(4) of section 315 of this 
     Act: Provided further, That, with respect to lands leased for 
     farming pursuant to Public Law 88-567, none of the funds in 
     this Act may be used to develop, implement, or enforce 
     regulations or policies (including pesticide use proposals) 
     related to the use of chemicals and pest management that are 
     more restrictive than the requirements of applicable State 
     and Federal laws related to the use of chemicals and pest 
     management practices on non-Federal lands.
                    Natural Resources Science Agency


                   research, inventories, and surveys

       For authorized expenses necessary for scientific research 
     relating to species biology, population dynamics, and 
     ecosystems; inventory and monitoring activities; technology 
     development and transfer; the operation of Cooperative 
     Research Units; for the purchase of not to exceed 61 
     passenger motor vehicles, of which 55 are for replacement 
     only; and for the general administration of the National 
     Biological Service, $145,965,000, of which $145,915,000 shall 
     remain available until September 30, 1997, and of which 
     $50,000 shall remain available until expended for 
     construction: Provided, That none of the funds under this 
     head shall be used to conduct new surveys on private property 
     unless specifically authorized in writing by the property 
     owner: Provided further, That none of the funds provided 
     herein for resource research may be used to administer a 
     volunteer program when it is made known to the Federal 
     official having authority to obligate or expend such funds 
     that the volunteers are not properly trained or that 
     information gathered by the volunteers is not carefully 
     verified: Provided further, That no later than April 1, 1996, 
     the Assistant Secretary for Water and Science shall issue 
     agency guidelines for resource research that ensure that 
     scientific and technical peer review is used as fully as 
     possible in selection of projects for funding and ensure the 
     validity and reliability of research and data collection on 
     Federal lands: Provided further, That no funds available for 
     resource research may be used for any activity that was not 
     authorized prior to the establishment of the National 
     Biological Survey: Provided further, That once every five 
     years the National Academy of Sciences shall review and 
     report on the resource research activities of the agency: 
     Provided further, That if specific authorizing legislation is 
     enacted during or before the start of fiscal year 1996, the 
     agency should comply with the provisions of that legislation.
                         National Park Service


                 operation of the national park system

       For expenses necessary for the management, operation, and 
     maintenance of areas and facilities administered by the 
     National Park Service (including special road maintenance 
     service to trucking permittees on a reimbursable basis), and 
     for the general administration of the National Park Service, 
     including not to exceed $1,593,000 for the Volunteers-in-
     Parks program, and not less than $1,000,000 for high priority 
     projects within the scope of the approved budget which shall 
     be carried out by the Youth Conservation Corps as authorized 
     by the Act of August 13, 1970, as amended by Public Law 93-
     408, [$1,088,249,000] $1,092,265,000, without regard to the 
     Act of August 24, 1912, as amended (16 U.S.C. 451), of which 
     not to exceed $72,000,000, to remain available until expended 
     is to be derived from the special fee account established 
     pursuant to title V, section 5201, of Public Law 100-203[, 
     and of which not more than $1 shall be available for activies 
     of the National Park Service at the Mojave National 
     Preserve].


                  national recreation and preservation

       For expenses necessary to carry out recreation programs, 
     natural programs, cultural programs, environmental compliance 
     and review, international park affairs, statutory or 
     contractual aid for other activities, and grant 
     administration, not otherwise provided for, [$35,725,000] 
     $38,051,000: Provided, That [$248,000] $236,000 of the funds 
     provided herein are for the William O. Douglas Outdoor 
     Education Center, subject to authorization.


                       historic preservation fund

       For expenses necessary in carrying out the provisions of 
     the Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (80 Stat. 915), as 
     amended (16 U.S.C. 470), [$37,934,000]  $38,312,000, to be 
     derived from the Historic Preservation Fund, established by 
     section 108 of that Act, as amended, to remain available for 
     obligation until September 30, 1997.


                              construction

       For construction, improvements, repair or replacement of 
     physical facilities, [$114,868,000] $116,480,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That not to exceed 
     [$6,000,000] $4,500,000 shall be paid to the Army Corps of 
     Engineers for modifications authorized by section 104 of the 
     Everglades National Park Protection and Expansion Act of 
     1989: Provided further, That up to $1,500,000 of the funds 
     provided under this head, to be derived from the Historic 
     Preservation Fund, established by the Historic Preservation 
     Act of 1966 (80 Stat. 915), as amended (16 U.S.C. 470), shall 
     be available until expended to render the site safe for 
     visitors and to continue building stabilization of the 
     Kennicott, Alaska copper mine.


                    land and water conservation fund

                              (rescission)

       The contract authority provided for fiscal year 1996 by 16 
     U.S.C. 460l-10a is rescinded.
                 land acquisition and state assistance

       For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of the 
     Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, as amended (16 
     U.S.C. 460l-4-11), including administrative expenses, and for 
     acquisition of lands or waters, or interest therein, in 
     accordance with statutory authority applicable to the 
     National Park Service, [$14,300,000] $43,230,000, to be 
     derived from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, to remain 
     available until expended[, of which $4,800,000 is provided 
     for Federal assistance to the State of Florida pursuant to 
     Public Law 103-219,] and of which $1,500,000 is to administer 
     the State assistance program: Provided, That funds 
     appropriated herein for the purpose of acquisition of the 
     Elwha and Glines dams shall be used solely for acquisition, 
     and shall not be expended until the full purchase amount has 
     been appropriated by the Congress.


                       administrative provisions

       Appropriations for the National Park Service shall be 
     available for the purchase of not to exceed 518 passenger 
     motor vehicles, of which 323 shall be for replacement only, 
     including not to exceed 411 for police-type use, 12 buses, 
     and 5 ambulances: Provided, That none of the funds 
     appropriated to the National Park Service may be used to 
     process any grant or contract documents which do not include 
     the text of 18 U.S.C. 1913: Provided further, That none of 
     the funds appropriated to the National Park Service may be 
     used to implement an agreement for the redevelopment of the 
     southern end of Ellis Island until such agreement has been 
     submitted to the Congress and shall not be implemented prior 
     to the expiration of 30 calendar days (not including any day 
     in which either House of Congress is not in session because 
     of adjournment of more than three calendar days to a day 
     certain) from the receipt by the Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives and the President of the Senate of a full and 
     comprehensive report on the development of the southern end 
     of Ellis Island, including the facts and circumstances relied 
     upon in support of the proposed project.
       None of the funds in this Act may be spent by the National 
     Park Service for a United Nations Biodiversity Initiative in 
     the United States.
                    United States Geological Survey


                 surveys, investigations, and research

       For expenses necessary for the United States Geological 
     Survey to perform surveys, investigations, and research 
     covering topography, geology, hydrology, and the mineral and 
     water resources of the United States, its Territories and 
     possessions, and other areas as authorized by law (43 U.S.C. 
     31, 1332 and 1340); classify lands as to their mineral and 
     water resources; give engineering supervision to power 
     permittees and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
     licensees; administer the minerals exploration program (30 
     U.S.C. 641); and publish and disseminate data relative to the 
     foregoing activities; [$686,944,000] $577,503,000, of which 
     $62,130,000 shall be available for cooperation with States or 
     municipalities for water resources investigations[, and of 
     which $112,888,000 for resource research and the operations 
     of Cooperative Research Units shall remain available until 
     September 30, 1997]: Provided, That no part of this 
     appropriation shall be used to pay more than one-half the 
     cost of any topographic mapping or water resources 
     investigations carried on in cooperation with any State or 
     municipality[: Provided further, That funds available herein 
     for resource research may be used for the purchase of not to 
     exceed 61 passenger motor vehicles, of which 55 are for 
     replacement only: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     available under this head for resource research shall be used 
     to conduct new surveys on private property except when it is 
     made known to the Federal official having authority to 
     obligate or expend such funds that the survey or research has 
     been requested and authorized in writing by the property 
     owner or the owner's authorized representative: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds provided herein for resource 
     research may be used to administer a volunteer program when 
     it is made known to the Federal official having authority to 
     obligate or expend such funds that the volunteers are not 
     properly trained or that information gathered by the 
     volunteers is not carefully verified: Provided further, That 
     no later than April 1, 1996, the Director of the United 
     States Geological Survey shall issue agency guidelines for 
     resource research that ensure that scientific and technical 
     peer review is utilized as fully as possible in selection of 
     projects for funding and ensure the validity and reliability 
     of research and data collection on Federal lands: Provided 
     further, That no funds available for resource research may be 
     used for any activity that was not authorized prior to the 
     establishment of the 

[[Page S 11848]]
     National Biological Survey: Provided further, That once every five 
     years the National Academy of Sciences shall review and 
     report on the resource research activities of the Survey: 
     Provided further, That if specific authorizing legislation is 
     enacted during or before the start of fiscal year 1996, the 
     resource research component of the Survey should comply with 
     the provisions of that legislation: Provided further, That 
     unobligated and unexpended balances in the National 
     Biological Survey, Research, inventories and surveys account 
     at the end of fiscal year 1995, shall be merged with and made 
     a part of the United States Geological Survey, Surveys, 
     investigations, and research account and shall remain 
     available for obligation until September 30, 1996].
                       administrative provisions

       The amount appropriated for the United States Geological 
     Survey shall be available for purchase of not to exceed 22 
     passenger motor vehicles, for replacement only; reimbursement 
     to the General Services Administration for security guard 
     services; contracting for the furnishing of topographic maps 
     and for the making of geophysical or other specialized 
     surveys when it is administratively determined that such 
     procedures are in the public interest; construction and 
     maintenance of necessary buildings and appurtenant 
     facilities; acquisition of lands for gauging stations and 
     observation wells; expenses of the United States National 
     Committee on Geology; and payment of compensation and 
     expenses of persons on the rolls of the United States 
     Geological Survey appointed, as authorized by law, to 
     represent the United States in the negotiation and 
     administration of interstate compacts: Provided, That 
     activities funded by appropriations herein made may be 
     accomplished through the use of contracts, grants, or 
     cooperative agreements as defined in 31 U.S.C. 6302, et seq.

                      Minerals Management Service


                royalty and offshore minerals management

       For expenses necessary for minerals leasing and 
     environmental studies, regulation of industry operations, and 
     collection of royalties, as authorized by law; for enforcing 
     laws and regulations applicable to oil, gas, and other 
     minerals leases, permits, licenses and operating contracts; 
     and for matching grants or cooperative agreements; including 
     the purchase of not to exceed eight passenger motor vehicles 
     for replacement only; [$186,556,000] $182,169,000, of which 
     not less than $70,105,000 shall be available for royalty 
     management activities; and an amount not to exceed 
     [$12,400,000] $15,400,000 for the Technical Information 
     Management System [of] and Related Activities of the Outer 
     Continental Shelf (OCS) Lands Activity, to be credited to 
     this appropriation and to remain available until expended, 
     from additions to receipts resulting from increases to rates 
     in effect on August 5, 1993, from rate increases to fee 
     collections for OCS administrative activities performed by 
     the Minerals Management Service over and above the rates in 
     effect on September 30, 1993, and from additional fees for 
     OCS administrative activities established after September 30, 
     1993: Provided, That beginning in fiscal year 1996 and 
     thereafter, fees for royalty rate relief applications shall 
     be established (and revised as needed) in Notices to Lessees, 
     and shall be credited to this account in the program areas 
     performing the function, and remain available until expended 
     for the costs of administering the royalty rate relief 
     authorized by 43 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3): Provided further, That 
     $1,500,000 for computer acquisitions shall remain available 
     until September 30, 1997: Provided further, That funds 
     appropriated under this Act shall be available for the 
     payment of interest in accordance with 30 U.S.C. 1721 (b) and 
     (d): Provided further, That not to exceed $3,000 shall be 
     available for reasonable expenses related to promoting 
     volunteer beach and marine cleanup activities: Provided 
     further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     $15,000 under this head shall be available for refunds of 
     overpayments in connection with certain Indian leases in 
     which the Director of the Minerals Management Service 
     concurred with the claimed refund due, to pay amounts owed to 
     Indian allottees or Tribes, or to correct prior unrecoverable 
     erroneous payments: Provided further, That beginning in 
     fiscal year 1996 and thereafter, the Secretary shall take 
     appropriate action to collect unpaid and underpaid royalties 
     and late payment interest owed by Federal and Indian mineral 
     lessees and other royalty payors on amounts received in 
     settlement or other resolution of disputes under, and for 
     partial or complete termination of, sales agreements for 
     minerals from Federal and Indian leases.


                           oil spill research

       For necessary expenses to carry out the purposes of title 
     I, section 1016, title IV, sections 4202 and 4303, title VII, 
     and title VIII, section 8201 of the Oil Pollution Act of 
     1990, $6,440,000, which shall be derived from the Oil Spill 
     Liability Trust Fund, to remain available until expended.

                            Bureau of Mines


                           mines and minerals

       [For expenses necessary for the orderly closure of the 
     Bureau of Mines, $87,000,000] For expenses necessary for 
     conducting inquiries, technological investigations, and 
     research concerning the extraction, processing, use, and 
     disposal of mineral substances without objectionable social 
     and environmental costs; to foster and encourage private 
     enterprise in the development of mineral resources and the 
     prevention of waste in the mining, minerals, metal, and 
     mineral reclamation industries; to inquire into the economic 
     conditions affecting those industries; to promote health and 
     safety in mines and the mineral industry through research; 
     and for other related purposes as authorized by law, 
     $132,507,000, of which $111,192,000 shall remain available 
     until expended.


                       administrative provisions

       The Secretary is authorized to accept lands, buildings, 
     equipment, other contributions, and fees from public and 
     private sources, and to prosecute projects using such 
     contributions and fees in cooperation with other Federal, 
     State or private agencies: Provided, That the Bureau of Mines 
     is authorized, during the current fiscal year, to sell 
     directly or through any Government agency, including 
     corporations, any metal or mineral products that may be 
     manufactured in pilot plants operated by the Bureau of Mines, 
     and the proceeds of such sales shall be covered into the 
     Treasury as miscellaneous receipts: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary is 
     authorized to convey, without reimbursement, title and all 
     interest of the United States in property and facilities of 
     the United States Bureau of Mines in Juneau, Alaska to the 
     City and Borough of Juneau, Alaska; in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, 
     to The University of Alabama; in Rolla, Missouri, to the 
     University of Missouri-Rolla; and in other localities to such 
     university or government entities as the Secretary deems 
     appropriate.

          Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement


                       regulation and technology

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the 
     Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, Public 
     Law 95-87, as amended, including the purchase of not to 
     exceed 15 passenger motor vehicles for replacement only; 
     [$92,751,000] $95,470,000, and notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 
     3302, an additional amount shall be credited to this account, 
     to remain available until expended, from performance bond 
     forfeitures in fiscal year 1996: Provided, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of 
     the Interior, pursuant to regulations, may utilize directly 
     or through grants to States, moneys collected in fiscal year 
     1996 pursuant to the assessment of civil penalties under 
     section 518 of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act 
     of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1268), to reclaim lands adversely affected 
     by coal mining practices after August 3, 1977, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, appropriations 
     for the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 
     may provide for the travel and per diem expenses of State and 
     tribal personnel attending Office of Surface Mining 
     Reclamation and Enforcement sponsored training.


                    abandoned mine reclamation fund

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of title 
     IV of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, 
     Public Law 95-87, as amended, including the purchase of not 
     more than 22 passenger motor vehicles for replacement only, 
     [$176,327,000] $170,441,000, to be derived from receipts of 
     the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund and to remain available 
     until expended[, of which $5,000,000 shall be used for 
     supplemental grants to States for the reclamation of 
     abandoned sites with acid mine rock drainage from coal mines 
     through the Appalachian Clean Streams Initiative]: Provided, 
     That grants to minimum program States will be $1,500,000 per 
     State in fiscal year 1996: Provided further, That of the 
     funds herein provided up to $18,000,000 may be used for the 
     emergency program authorized by section 410 of Public Law 95-
     87, as amended, of which no more than 25 per centum shall be 
     used for emergency reclamation projects in any one State and 
     funds for Federally-administered emergency reclamation 
     projects under this proviso shall not exceed $11,000,000[: 
     Provided further, That donations credited to the Abandoned 
     Mine Reclamation Fund, pursuant to section 401(b)(3) of 
     Public Law 95-87, are hereby appropriated and shall be 
     available until expended to support projects under the 
     Appalachian Clean Streams Initiative, directly, through 
     agreements with other Federal agencies, as otherwise 
     authorized, or through grants to States or local governments, 
     or tax-exempt private entities]: Provided further, That prior 
     year unobligated funds appropriated for the emergency 
     reclamation program shall not be subject to the 25 per centum 
     limitation per State and may be used without fiscal year 
     limitation for emergency projects: Provided further, That 
     pursuant to Public Law 97-365, the Department of the Interior 
     is authorized to utilize up to 20 per centum from the 
     recovery of the delinquent debt owed to the United States 
     Government to pay for contracts to collect these debts.
                        Bureau of Indian Affairs


                      operation of indian programs

       For operation of Indian programs by direct expenditure, 
     contracts, cooperative agreements, compacts, and grants 
     including expenses necessary to provide education and welfare 
     services for Indians, either directly or in cooperation with 
     States and other organizations, including payment of care, 
     tuition, assistance, and other expenses of Indians in 
     boarding homes, or institutions, or schools; grants and other 
     assistance to needy 

[[Page S 11849]]
     Indians; maintenance of law and order[; management, development, 
     improvement, and protection of resources and appurtenant 
     facilities under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Indian 
     Affairs, including payment of irrigation assessments and 
     charges; acquisition of water rights]; advances for Indian 
     industrial and business enterprises; operation of Indian arts 
     and crafts shops and museums; development of Indian arts and 
     crafts, as authorized by law; for the general administration 
     of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, including such expenses in 
     field offices; maintaining of Indian reservation roads as 
     defined in section 101 of title 23, United States Code; and 
     construction, repair, and improvement of Indian housing, 
     [$1,508,777,000 (plus $851,000)] $997,221,000, of which not 
     to exceed [$106,126,000] $104,626,000 shall be for payments 
     to tribes and tribal organizations for contract support costs 
     associated with ongoing contracts or grants or compacts 
     entered into with the Bureau of Indian Affairs prior to 
     fiscal year 1996, as authorized by the Indian Self-
     Determination Act of 1975, as amended, and [$5,000,000] up to 
     $5,000,000 shall be for the Indian Self-Determination Fund, 
     which shall be available for the transitional cost of initial 
     or expanded tribal contracts, grants, compacts, or 
     cooperative agreements with the Bureau of Indian Affairs 
     under the provisions of the Indian Self-Determination Act; 
     and of which not to exceed [$330,711,000] $330,991,000 for 
     school operations costs of Bureau-funded schools and other 
     education programs shall become available for obligation on 
     July 1, 1996, and shall remain available for obligation until 
     September 30, 1997; and of which not to exceed [$67,138,000] 
     $69,477,000 for higher education scholarships, adult 
     vocational training, and assistance to public schools under 
     the [Johnson O'Malley Act] Act of April 16, 1934 (48 Stat. 
     596), as amended (25 U.S.C. 452 et seq.), shall remain 
     available for obligation until September 30, 1997; and of 
     which not to exceed [$74,814,000] $35,331,000 shall remain 
     available until expended for [trust funds management,] 
     housing improvement, road maintenance, [attorney fees, 
     litigation support,] self-governance grants, and the Indian 
     Self-Determination Fund[, and the Navajo-Hopi Settlement 
     Program]: Provided, That tribes and tribal contractors may 
     use their tribal priority allocations for unmet indirect 
     costs of ongoing contracts, grants or compact agreements: 
     Provided further, That funds made available to tribes and 
     tribal organizations through contracts or grants obligated 
     during fiscal year 1996, as authorized by the Indian Self-
     Determination Act of 1975 (88 Stat. 2203; 25 U.S.C. 450 et 
     seq.), or grants authorized by the Indian Education 
     Amendments of 1988 (25 U.S.C. 2001 and 2008A) shall remain 
     available until expended by the contractor or grantee[: 
     Provided further, That notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the statute of limitations shall not commence to run on 
     any claim, including any claim in litigation pending on the 
     date of this Act, concerning losses to or mismanagement of 
     trust funds, until the affected tribe or individual Indian 
     has been furnished with the accounting of such funds from 
     which the beneficiary can determine whether there has been a 
     loss]: Provided further, That to provide funding uniformity 
     within a Self-Governance Compact, any funds provided in this 
     Act with availability for more than one year may be 
     reprogrammed to one year availability but shall remain 
     available within the Compact until expended: Provided 
     further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     Indian tribal governments may, by appropriate changes in 
     eligibility criteria or by other means, change eligibility 
     for general assistance or change the amount of general 
     assistance payments for individuals within the service area 
     of such tribe who are otherwise deemed eligible for general 
     assistance payments so long as such changes are applied in a 
     consistent manner to individuals similarly situated: Provided 
     further, That any savings realized by such changes shall be 
     available for use in meeting other priorities of the tribes: 
     Provided further, That any net increase in costs to the 
     Federal Government which result solely from tribally 
     increased payment levels for general assistance shall be met 
     exclusively from funds available to the tribe from within its 
     tribal priority allocation[: Provided further, That any 
     forestry funds allocated to a tribe which remain unobligated 
     as of September 30, 1996, may be transferred during fiscal 
     year 1997 to an Indian forest land assistance account 
     established for the benefit of such tribe within the tribe's 
     trust fund account: Provided further, That any such 
     unobligated balances not so transferred shall expire on 
     September 30, 1997]: Provided further, That notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law, no funds available to the Bureau 
     of Indian Affairs, other than the amounts provided herein for 
     assistance to public schools under the Act of April 16, 1934 
     (48 Stat. 596), as amended (25 U.S.C. 452 et seq.), shall be 
     available to support the operation of any elementary or 
     secondary school in the State of Alaska in fiscal year 1996: 
     Provided further, That funds made available in this or any 
     other Act for expenditure through September 30, 1997 for 
     schools funded by the Bureau of Indian Affairs shall be 
     available only to the schools which are in the Bureau of 
     Indian Affairs school system as of September 1, 1995: 
     Provided further, That no funds available to the Bureau of 
     Indian Affairs shall be used to support expanded grades for 
     any school beyond the grade structure in place at each school 
     in the Bureau of Indian Affairs school system as of October 
     1, 1995: Provided further, That notwithstanding the 
     provisions of 25 U.S.C. 2011(h)(1)(B) and (c), upon the 
     recommendation of a local school board for a Bureau of Indian 
     Affairs operated school, the Secretary shall establish rates 
     of basic compensation or annual salary rates for the 
     positions of teachers and counselors (including dormitory and 
     homeliving counselors) at the school at a level not less than 
     that for comparable positions in public school districts in 
     the same geographic area: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, no funds 
     available to the Bureau of Indian Affairs for central office 
     operations or pooled overhead general administration shall be 
     available for tribal contracts, grants, compacts, or 
     cooperative agreements with the Bureau of Indian Affairs 
     under the provisions of the Indian Self-Determination Act or 
     the Tribal Self-Governance Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-413), 
     unless a proposal for amounts to be available for such tribal 
     contracts, grants, compacts, or cooperative agreements has 
     been submitted to and approved by the Committees on 
     Appropriations: Provided further, That of the funds available 
     only through September 30, 1995, not to exceed $8,000,000 in 
     unobligated and unexpended balances in the Operation of 
     Indian Programs account shall be merged with and made a part 
     of the fiscal year 1996 Operation of Indian Programs 
     appropriation, and shall remain available for obligation for 
     employee severance, relocation, and related expenses, until 
     March 31, 1996.
                              construction

       For construction, major repair, and improvement of 
     [irrigation and power systems,] buildings, utilities, and 
     other facilities, including architectural and engineering 
     services by contract[; acquisition of lands and interests in 
     lands; and preparation of lands for farming, $98,033,000] 
     $60,088,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     [That such amounts as may be available for the construction 
     of the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project and for other water 
     resource development activities related to the Southern 
     Arizona Water Rights Settlement Act may be transferred to the 
     Bureau of Reclamation: Provided further,] That not to exceed 
     6 per centum of contract authority available to the Bureau of 
     Indian Affairs from the Federal Highway Trust Fund may be 
     used to cover the road program management costs of the Bureau 
     of Indian Affairs[: Provided further, That any funds provided 
     for the Safety of Dams program pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 13 shall 
     be made available on a non-reimbursable basis]: Provided 
     further, That for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, 
     in implementing new construction or facilities improvement 
     and repair project grants in excess of $100,000 that are 
     provided to tribally controlled grant schools under Public 
     Law 100-297, as amended, the Secretary of the Interior shall 
     use the Administrative and Audit Requirements and Cost 
     Principles for Assistance Programs contained in 43 CFR part 
     12 as the regulatory requirements: Provided further, That 
     such grants shall not be subject to section 12.61 of 43 CFR; 
     the Secretary and the grantee shall negotiate and determine a 
     schedule of payments for the work to be performed: Provided 
     further, That in considering applications, the Secretary 
     shall consider whether the Indian tribe or tribal 
     organization would be deficient in assuring that the 
     construction projects conform to applicable building 
     standards and codes and Federal, tribal, or State health and 
     safety standards as required by 25 U.S.C. 2005(a), with 
     respect to organizational and financial management 
     capabilities: Provided further, That if the Secretary 
     declines an application, the Secretary shall follow the 
     requirements contained in 25 U.S.C. 2505(f): Provided 
     further, That any disputes between the Secretary and any 
     grantee concerning a grant shall be subject to the disputes 
     provision in 25 U.S.C. 2508(e).
[indian land and water claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to 
                                indians

       [For miscellaneous payments to Indian tribes and 
     individuals and for necessary administrative expenses, 
     $75,145,000, to remain available until expended; of which 
     $73,100,000 shall be available for implementation of enacted 
     Indian land and water claim settlements pursuant to Public 
     Laws 87-483, 97-293, 101-618, 102-374, 102-441, 102-575, and 
     103-116, and for implementation of other enacted water rights 
     settlements, including not to exceed $8,000,000, which shall 
     be for the Federal share of the Catawba Indian Tribe of South 
     Carolina Claims Settlement, as authorized by section 5(a) of 
     Public Law 103-116; and of which $1,045,000 shall be 
     available pursuant to Public Laws 98-500, 99-264, and 100-
     580; and of which $1,000,000 shall be available (1) to 
     liquidate obligations owed tribal and individual Indian 
     payees of any checks canceled pursuant to section 1003 of the 
     Competitive Equality Banking Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-86 
     (101 Stat. 659)), 31 U.S.C. 3334(b), (2) to restore to 
     Individual Indian Monies trust funds, Indian Irrigation 
     Systems, and Indian Power Systems accounts amounts invested 
     in credit unions or defaulted savings and loan associations 
     and which were not Federally insured, and (3) to reimburse 
     Indian trust fund account holders for losses to their 
     respective accounts where the claim for said loss(es) has 
     been reduced to a judgment or settlement agreement approved 
     by the Department of Justice.]
               technical assistance of indian enterprises

       For payment of management and technical assistance requests 
     associated with loans and grants approved under the Indian 
     Financing Act of 1974, as amended, $900,000.
     
[[Page S 11850]]



                 indian guaranteed loan program account

       For the cost of guaranteed loans $7,000,000, as authorized 
     by the Indian Financing Act of 1974, as amended: Provided, 
     That such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, 
     shall be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974, as amended: Provided further, That these 
     funds are available to subsidize total loan principal, any 
     part of which is to be guaranteed, not to exceed $50,680,000.
       In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry 
     out the guaranteed loan program, $700,000.
                       administrative provisions

       Appropriations for the Bureau of Indian Affairs shall be 
     available for expenses of exhibits, and purchase of not to 
     exceed 275 passenger carrying motor vehicles, of which not to 
     exceed 215 shall be for replacement only.

                 Territorial and International Affairs


                       assistance to territories

       For expenses necessary for assistance to territories under 
     the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior, 
     [$52,405,000, to remain available until expended for brown 
     tree snake control and research] $68,188,000, of which (1) 
     $64,661,000 shall be available until expended for technical 
     assistance, including maintenance assistance, disaster 
     assistance, insular management controls, and brown tree snake 
     control and research; grants to the judiciary in American 
     Samoa for compensation and expenses, as authorized by law (48 
     U.S.C. 1661(c)); grants to the Government of American Samoa, 
     in addition to current local revenues, for construction and 
     support of governmental functions; grants to the Government 
     of the Virgin Islands as authorized by law; grants to the 
     Government of Guam, as authorized by law; and grants to the 
     Government of the Northern Mariana Islands as authorized by 
     law (Public Law 94-241; 90 Stat. 272); and (2) $3,527,000 
     shall be available for salaries and expenses of the Office of 
     Insular Affairs: Provided, That all financial transactions of 
     the territorial and local governments herein provided for, 
     including such transactions of all agencies or 
     instrumentalities established or utilized by such 
     governments, may be audited by the General Accounting Office, 
     at its discretion, in accordance with chapter 35 of title 31, 
     United States Code: Provided further, That Northern Mariana 
     Islands Covenant grant funding shall be provided according to 
     those terms of the Agreement of the Special Representatives 
     on Future United States Financial Assistance for the Northern 
     Mariana Islands approved by Public Law 99-396, or any 
     subsequent legislation related to Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands Covenant grant funding: Provided 
     further, That of the amounts provided for technical 
     assistance, sufficient funding shall be made available for a 
     grant to the Close Up Foundation: Provided further, That the 
     funds for the program of operations and maintenance 
     improvement are appropriated to institutionalize routine 
     operations and maintenance of capital infrastructure in 
     American Samoa, Guam, the Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of 
     the Northern Mariana Islands, the Republic of Palau, the 
     Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of 
     Micronesia through assessments of long-range operations and 
     maintenance needs, improved capability of local operations 
     and maintenance institutions and agencies (including 
     management and vocational education training), and project-
     specific maintenance (with territorial participation and cost 
     sharing to be determined by the Secretary based on the 
     individual territory's commitment to timely maintenance of 
     its capital assets): Provided further, That any appropriation 
     for disaster assistance under this head in this Act or 
     previous appropriations Acts may be used as non-Federal 
     matching funds for the purpose of hazard mitigation grants 
     provided pursuant to section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford 
     Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 
     5170c).


                      compact of free association

       For economic assistance and necessary expenses for the 
     Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of the 
     Marshall Islands as provided for in sections 122, 221, 223, 
     232, and 233 of the Compacts of Free Association, and for 
     economic assistance and necessary expenses for the Republic 
     of Palau as provided for in sections 122, 221, 223, 232, and 
     233 of the Compact of Free Association, $24,938,000, to 
     remain available until expended, as authorized by Public Law 
     99-239 and Public Law 99-658[, and $4,580,000 for impact aid 
     for Guam under section 104(e)(6) of Public Law 99-239]: 
     Provided, That notwithstanding section 112 of Public Law 101-
     219 (103 Stat. 1873), the Secretary of the Interior may agree 
     to technical changes in the specifications for the project 
     described in the subsidiary agreement negotiated under 
     section 212(a) of the Compact of Free Association, Public Law 
     99-658, or its annex, if the changes do not result in 
     increased costs to the United States.

                          Departmental Offices
                       [Office of the Secretary]
                        Departmental Management
                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses [of the Office of the Secretary] for 
     management of the Department of the Interior, [$53,919,000] 
     $58,109,000, of which not to exceed $7,500 may be for 
     official reception and representation expenses: Provided, 
     That none of the funds provided herein for official reception 
     and representation expenses shall be available until the 
     Charter for the Advisory Commission referred to in Title 30 
     of Public Law 102-575 has been filed and the Members of such 
     Commission appointed.

                        Office of the Solicitor


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Solicitor, 
     $34,608,000.

                      Office of Inspector General

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General, 
     $23,939,000.
                        Construction Management


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Construction 
     Management, $500,000.
                   National Indian Gaming Commission


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the National Indian Gaming 
     Commission, pursuant to Public Law 100-497, $1,000,000: 
     Provided, That on October 1, 1995, the Chairman shall submit 
     to the Secretary a report detailing those Indian tribes or 
     tribal organizations with gaming operations that are in full 
     compliance, partial compliance, or non-compliance with the 
     provisions of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 
     2701, et seq.): Provided further, That the information 
     contained in the report shall be updated on a continuing 
     basis.
             Office of Special Trustee for American Indians


                         federal trust programs

       For operation of trust programs for Indians by direct 
     expenditure, contracts, cooperative agreements, compacts, and 
     grants including expenses necessary to provide for 
     management, development, improvement, and protection of 
     resources and appurtenant facilities formerly under the 
     jurisdiction of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, including 
     payment of irrigation assessments and charges and acquisition 
     of water rights, $280,038,000, of which $15,964,000 shall 
     remain available until expended for trust funds management, 
     attorney fees, litigation support, and the Navajo-Hopi 
     Settlement Program: Provided, That funds made available to 
     tribes and tribal organizations through contracts or grants 
     obligated during fiscal year 1996, as authorized by the 
     Indian Self-Determination Act of 1975 (88 Stat. 2203; 25 
     U.S.C. 450 et seq.), shall remain available until expended by 
     the contractor or grantee: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, the statute of 
     limitations shall not commence to run on any claim, including 
     any claim in litigation pending on the date of this Act, 
     concerning losses to or mismanagement of trust funds, until 
     the affected tribe or individual Indian has been furnished 
     with the accounting of such funds from which the beneficiary 
     can determine whether there has been a loss: Provided 
     further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     reconciliation report to be submitted pursuant to Public Law 
     103-412 shall be submitted by November 30, 1997: Provided 
     further, That any forestry funds allocated to a tribe which 
     remain unobligated as of September 30, 1996, may be 
     transferred during fiscal year 1997 to an Indian forest land 
     assistance account established for the benefit of such tribe 
     within the tribe's fund account: Provided further, That any 
     such obligated balances not so transferred shall expire on 
     September 30, 1997: Provided further, That obligated and 
     unobligated balances provided for trust funds management, 
     attorney fees, litigation support, and the Navajo-Hopi 
     Settlement Program within ``Operation of Indian programs,'' 
     Bureau of Indian Affairs are hereby transferred to and merged 
     with this appropriation.


                              construction

       For construction, major repair, and improvement of 
     irrigation and power systems; acquisition of lands and 
     interest in lands; and preparation of lands for farming, 
     $47,245,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That such amounts as may be available for the construction of 
     the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project and for other water 
     resource development activities related to the Southern 
     Arizona Water Rights Settlement Act may be transferred to the 
     Bureau of Reclamation: Provided further, That any funds 
     provided for the Safety of Dams program pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 
     13 shall be made available on a non-reimbursable basis: 
     Provided further, That all irrigation and power projects and 
     dams under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Indian Affairs 
     on the date of enactment of this Act are hereby transferred 
     to the jurisdiction of the Special Trustee for American 
     Indians: Provided further, That the obligated and unobligated 
     balances of the resources management activity within 
     ``Construction,'' Bureau of Indian Affairs, are hereby 
     transferred to and merged with this appropriation.
 indian land and water claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to 
                                indians

       For miscellaneous payments to Indian tribes and individuals 
     and for necessary administrative expenses, $82,745,000, to 
     remain available until expended; of which $78,600,000 shall 
     be available for implementation of enacted Indian land and 
     water claim settlements pursuant to Public Laws 87-483, 97-
     293, 101-618, 102-374, 102-441, 102-575, and 103-116, and for 
     implementation of other enacted water rights settlements, 
     including not to exceed $8,000,000, which shall be for the 
     Federal share of the Catawba Indian Tribe of South Carolina 
     Claims Settlement, as authorized by section 5(a) of Public 
     Law 103-116; and of which $1,045,000 shall be available 
     pursuant to Public Laws 98-500, 99-264, and 100-580; and of 
     which $3,100,000 shall be available (1) to liquidate 
     obligations owed tribal and individual Indian payees of any 
     checks canceled pursuant to section 1003 of the Competitive 
     Equality Banking Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-86 (101 Stat. 
     659)), 31 U.S.C. 3334(b), (2) to restore to Individual Indian 
     Monies trust funds, 

[[Page S 11851]]
     Indian Irrigation Systems, and Indian Power Systems accounts amounts 
     invested in credit unions or defaulted savings and loan 
     associations and which were not Federally insured, and (3) to 
     reimburse Indian trust fund account holders for losses to 
     their respective accounts where the claim for said loss(es) 
     has been reduced to a judgment or settlement agreement 
     approved by the Department of Justice: Provided, That the 
     obligated and unobligated balances of ``Indian land and water 
     claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to Indians,'' 
     Bureau of Indian Affairs, are hereby transferred to and 
     merged with this appropriation.


                transfers of balances of appropriations

       Under the terms and conditions of the original 
     appropriations, the obligated and unobligated balances of the 
     following appropriations are hereby transferred from the 
     Bureau of Indian Affairs to the Office of the Special Trustee 
     for American Indians: Navajo Rehabilitation Trust Fund, 
     Claims and Treaty Obligations, O&M Indian Irrigation Systems, 
     Cooperative Fund (Papago), Tribal Trust Funds, Funds 
     Contributed for the Advancement of the Indian Race, Bequest 
     of George C. Edgeter, Northern Cheyenne, Payment to Tribal 
     Economic Recovery Fund, Crow Boundary Settlement Act, and 
     Tribal Economic Recovery Fund.
                       Administrative Provisions

       There is hereby authorized for acquisition from available 
     resources within the Working Capital Fund, 15 aircraft, 10 of 
     which shall be for replacement and which may be obtained by 
     donation, purchase or through available excess surplus 
     property: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, existing aircraft being replaced may be sold, with 
     proceeds derived or trade-in value used to offset the 
     purchase price for the replacement aircraft: Provided 
     further, That no programs funded with appropriated funds in 
     [the ``Office of the Secretary''] ``Departmental 
     Management'', ``Office of the Solicitor'', and ``Office of 
     Inspector General'' may be augmented through the Working 
     Capital Fund or the Consolidated Working Fund.
             GENERAL PROVISIONS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

       Sec. 101. Appropriations made in this title shall be 
     available for expenditure or transfer (within each bureau or 
     office), with the approval of the Secretary, for the 
     emergency reconstruction, replacement, or repair of aircraft, 
     buildings, utilities, or other facilities or equipment 
     damaged or destroyed by fire, flood, storm, or other 
     unavoidable causes: Provided, That no funds shall be made 
     available under this authority until funds specifically made 
     available to the Department of the Interior for emergencies 
     shall have been exhausted: Provided further, That all funds 
     used pursuant to this section are hereby designated by 
     Congress to be ``emergency requirements'' pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(D) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985 and [must,] must be replenished by a 
     supplemental appropriation which must be requested as 
     promptly as possible.
       Sec. 102. The Secretary may authorize the expenditure or 
     transfer of any no year appropriation in this title, in 
     addition to the amounts included in the budget programs of 
     the several agencies, for the suppression or emergency 
     prevention of forest or range fires on or threatening lands 
     under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior; for 
     the emergency rehabilitation of burned-over lands under its 
     jurisdiction; for emergency actions related to potential or 
     actual earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, storms, or other 
     unavoidable causes; for contingency planning subsequent to 
     actual oilspills; response and natural resource damage 
     assessment activities related to actual oilspills; for the 
     prevention, suppression, and control of actual or potential 
     grasshopper and Mormon cricket outbreaks on lands under the 
     jurisdiction of the Secretary, pursuant to the authority in 
     section 1773(b) of Public Law 99-198 (99 Stat. 1658); for 
     emergency reclamation projects under section 410 of Public 
     Law 95-87; and shall transfer, from any no year funds 
     available to the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 
     Enforcement, such funds as may be necessary to permit 
     assumption of regulatory authority in the event a primacy 
     State is not carrying out the regulatory provisions of the 
     Surface Mining Act: Provided, That appropriations made in 
     this title for fire suppression purposes shall be available 
     for the payment of obligations incurred during the preceding 
     fiscal year, and for reimbursement to other Federal agencies 
     for destruction of vehicles, aircraft, or other equipment in 
     connection with their use for fire suppression purposes, such 
     reimbursement to be credited to appropriations currently 
     available at the time of receipt thereof: Provided further, 
     That for emergency rehabilitation and wildfire suppression 
     activities, no funds shall be made available under this 
     authority until funds appropriated to the ``Emergency 
     Department of the Interior Firefighting Fund'' shall have 
     been exhausted: Provided further, That all funds used 
     pursuant to this section are hereby designated by Congress to 
     be ``emergency requirements'' pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(D) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985 and must be replenished by a supplemental 
     appropriation which must be requested as promptly as 
     possible: Provided further, That such replenishment funds 
     shall be used to reimburse, on a pro rata basis, accounts 
     from which emergency funds were transferred.
       Sec. 103. Appropriations made in this title shall be 
     available for operation of warehouses, garages, shops, and 
     similar facilities, wherever consolidation of activities will 
     contribute to efficiency or economy, and said appropriations 
     shall be reimbursed for services rendered to any other 
     activity in the same manner as authorized by sections 1535 
     and 1536 of title 31, U.S.C.: Provided, That reimbursements 
     for costs and supplies, materials, equipment, and for 
     services rendered may be credited to the appropriation 
     current at the time such reimbursements are received.
       Sec. 104. Appropriations made to the Department of the 
     Interior in this title shall be available for services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, when authorized by the 
     Secretary, in total amount not to exceed $500,000; hire, 
     maintenance, and operation of aircraft; hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles; purchase of reprints; payment for telephone 
     service in private residences in the field, when authorized 
     under regulations approved by the Secretary; and the payment 
     of dues, when authorized by the Secretary, for library 
     membership in societies or associations which issue 
     publications to members only or at a price to members lower 
     than to subscribers who are not members.
       Sec. 105. Appropriations available to the Department of the 
     Interior for salaries and expenses shall be available for 
     uniforms or allowances therefor, as authorized by law (5 
     U.S.C. 5901-5902 and D.C. Code 4-204).
       Sec. 106. Appropriations made in this title shall be 
     available for obligation in connection with contracts issued 
     for services or rentals for periods not in excess of twelve 
     months beginning at any time during the fiscal year.
       [Sec. 107. Appropriations made in this title from the Land 
     and Water Conservation Fund for acquisition of lands and 
     waters, or interests therein, shall be available for 
     transfer, with the approval of the Secretary, between the 
     following accounts: Bureau of Land Management, Land 
     acquisition, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Land 
     acquisition, and National Park Service, Land acquisition and 
     State assistance. Use of such funds are subject to the 
     reprogramming guidelines of the House and Senate Committees 
     on Appropriations.
       [Sec.  108. Amounts appropriated in this Act for the 
     Presidio which are not obligated as of the date on which the 
     Presidio Trust is established by an Act of Congress shall be 
     transferred to and available only for the Presidio Trust.
       [Sec. 109. Section 6003 of Public Law 101-380 is hereby 
     repealed.]
       Sec. 110. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act may be obligated or expended by the 
     Secretary of the Interior for developing, promulgating, and 
     thereafter implementing a rule concerning rights-of-way under 
     section 2477 of the Revised Statutes.
       Sec. 111. No funds provided in this title may be expended 
     by the Department of the Interior for the conduct of offshore 
     leasing and related activities placed under restriction in 
     the President's moratorium statement of June 26, 1990, in the 
     areas of Northern, Central, and Southern California; the 
     North Atlantic; Washington and Oregon; and the Eastern Gulf 
     of Mexico south of 26 degrees north latitude and east of 86 
     degrees west longitude.
       Sec. 112. No funds provided in this title may be expended 
     by the Department of the Interior for the conduct of leasing, 
     or the approval or permitting of any drilling or other 
     exploration activity, on lands within the North Aleutian 
     Basin planning area.
       Sec. 113. No funds provided in this title may be expended 
     by the Department of the Interior for the conduct of 
     preleasing and leasing activities in the Eastern Gulf of 
     Mexico for Outer Continental Shelf Lease Sale 151 in the 
     Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Oil Resource 
     Management Comprehensive Program, 1992-1997.
       Sec. 114. No funds provided in this title may be expended 
     by the Department of the Interior for the conduct of 
     preleasing and leasing activities in the Atlantic for Outer 
     Continental Shelf Lease Sale 164 in the Outer Continental 
     Shelf Natural Gas and Oil Resource Management Comprehensive 
     Program, 1992-1997.
       Sec. 115. (a) Of the funds appropriated by this Act or any 
     subsequent Act providing for appropriations in fiscal years 
     1996 and 1997, not more than 50 percent of any self-
     governance funds that would otherwise be allocated to each 
     Indian tribe in the State of Washington shall actually be 
     paid to or on account of such Indian tribe from and after the 
     time at which such tribe shall--
       (1) take unilateral action that adversely impacts the 
     existing rights to and/or customary uses of, nontribal member 
     owners of fee simple land within the exterior boundary of the 
     tribe's reservation to water, electricity, or any other 
     similar utility or necessity for the nontribal members' 
     residential use of such land; or
       (2) restrict or threaten to restrict said owners use of or 
     access to publicly maintained rights of way necessary or 
     desirable in carrying the utilities or necessities described 
     above.
       (b) Such penalty shall attach to the initiation of any 
     legal action with respect to such rights or the enforcement 
     of any final judgment, appeals from which has been exhausted, 
     with respect thereto.
       Sec. 116. Within 30 days after the enactment of this Act, 
     the Department of the Interior shall issue a specific 
     schedule for the completion of the Lake Cushman Land Exchange 
     Act (Public Law 102-436) and shall complete the exchange not 
     later than September 30, 1996. 

[[Page S 11852]]

       Sec. 117. Notwithstanding Public Law 90-544, as amended, 
     the National Park Service is authorized to expend 
     appropriated funds for maintenance and repair of the Company 
     Creek Road in the Lake Chelan National Recreation Area: 
     Provided, That appropriated funds shall not be expended for 
     the purpose of improving the property of private individuals 
     unless specifically authorized by law.
       Sec. 118. Insular Development.--

   Section 1. Territorial and Freely Associated State Infrastructure 
                               Assistance

       Section 4(b) of Public Law 94-241 (90 Stat. 263) as added 
     by section 10 of Public Law 99-396 (99 Stat. 837, 841) is 
     amended by deleting ``until Congress otherwise provides by 
     law.'' and inserting in lieu thereof: ``except that, for 
     fiscal years 1996 and thereafter, payments to the 
     Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands pursuant to the 
     multi-year funding agreements contemplated under the Covenant 
     shall be limited to the amounts set forth in the Agreement of 
     the Special Representatives on Future Federal Financial 
     Assistance of the Northern Mariana Islands, executed on 
     December 17, 1992 between the special representative of the 
     President of the United States and special representatives of 
     the Governor of the Northern Mariana Islands and shall be 
     subject to all the requirements of such Agreement with any 
     additional amounts otherwise made available under this 
     section in any fiscal year and not required to meet the 
     schedule of payments set forth in the Agreement to be 
     provided as set forth in subsection (c) until Congress 
     otherwise provides by law.
       ``(c) The additional amounts referred to in subsection (b) 
     shall be made available to the Secretary for obligation as 
     follows:
       ``(1) for fiscal year 1996, all such amounts shall be 
     provided for capital infrastructure projects in American 
     Samoa; and
       ``(2) for fiscal years 1997 and thereafter, all such 
     amounts shall be available solely for capital infrastructure 
     projects in Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, the 
     Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Republic of 
     Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of 
     the Marshall Islands: Provided, That, in fiscal year 1997, 
     $3,000,000 of such amounts shall be made available to the 
     College of the Northern Marianas and beginning in fiscal year 
     1997, and in each year thereafter, not to exceed $3,000,000 
     may be allocated, as provided in Appropriation Acts, to the 
     Secretary of the Interior for use by Federal agencies or the 
     Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands to address 
     immigration, labor, and law enforcement issues in the 
     Northern Mariana Islands, including, but not limited to 
     detention and corrections needs. The specific projects to be 
     funded shall be set forth in a five-year plan for 
     infrastructure assistance developed by the Secretary of the 
     Interior in consultation with each of the island governments 
     and updated annually and submitted to the Congress concurrent 
     with the budget justifications for the Department of the 
     Interior. In developing and updating the five year plan for 
     capital infrastructure needs, the Secretary shall indicate 
     the highest priority projects, consider the extent to which 
     particular projects are part of an overall master plan, 
     whether such project has been reviewed by the Corps of 
     Engineers and any recommendations made as a result of such 
     review, the extent to which a set-aside for maintenance would 
     enhance the life of the project, the degree to which a local 
     cost-share requirement would be consistent with local 
     economic and fiscal capabilities, and may propose an 
     incremental set-aside, not to exceed $2,000,000 per year, to 
     remain available without fiscal year limitation, as an 
     emergency fund in the event of natural or other disasters to 
     supplement other assistance in the repair, replacement, or 
     hardening of essential facilities: Provided further, That the 
     cumulative amount set aside for such emergency fund may not 
     exceed $10,000,000 at any time.
       ``(d) Within the amounts allocated for infrastructure 
     pursuant to this section, and subject to the specific 
     allocations made in subsection (c), additional contributions 
     may be made, as set forth in Appropriation Acts, to assist in 
     the resettlement of Rongelap Atoll: Provided, That the total 
     of all contributions from any Federal source after January 1, 
     1996 may not exceed $32,000,000 and shall be contingent upon 
     an agreement, satisfactory to the President, that such 
     contributions are a full and final settlement of all 
     obligations of the United States to assist in the 
     resettlement of Rongelap Atoll and that such funds will be 
     expended solely on resettlement activities and will be 
     property audited and accounted for. In order to provide such 
     contributions in a timely manner, each Federal agency 
     providing assistance or services, or conducting activities, 
     in the Republic of the Marshall Islands, is authorized to 
     make funds available, through the Secretary of the Interior, 
     to assist in the resettlement of Rongelap. Nothing in this 
     subsection shall be construed to limit the provision of ex 
     gratia assistance pursuant to section 105(c)(2) of the 
     Compact of Free Association Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-239, 
     99 Stat. 1770, 1792) including for individuals choosing not 
     to resettle at Rongelap, except that no such assistance for 
     such individuals may be provided until the Secretary notifies 
     the Congress that the full amount of all funds necessary for 
     resettlement at Rongelap has been provided.''.
                      Sec. 2. Federal Minimum Wage

       Effective thirty days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the minimum wage provisions, including, but not limited 
     to, the coverage and exemptions provisions, of section 6 of 
     the Fair Labor Standards Act of June 25, 1938 (52 Stat. 
     1062), as amended, shall apply to the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands, except--
       (a) on the effective date, the minimum wage rate applicable 
     to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands shall be 
     $2.75 per hour;
       (b) effective January 1, 1996, the minimum wage rate 
     applicable to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 
     Islands shall be $3.05 per hour;
       (c) effective January 1, 1997 and every January 1 
     thereafter, the minimum wage rate shall be raised by thirty 
     cents per hour or the amount necessary to raise the minimum 
     wage rate to the wage rate set forth in section 6(a)(1) of 
     the Fair Labor Standards Act, whichever is less; and
       (d) once the minimum wage rate is equal to the wage rate 
     set forth in section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 
     the minimum wage rate applicable to the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands shall thereafter be the wage rate 
     set forth in section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

                             Sec. 3. Report

       The Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the 
     Attorney General and Secretaries of Treasury, Labor, and 
     State, shall report to the Congress by the March 15 following 
     each fiscal year for which funds are allocated pursuant to 
     section 4(c) of Public Law 94-241 for use by Federal agencies 
     or the Commonwealth to address immigration, labor or law 
     enforcement activities. The report shall include but not be 
     limited to--
       (1) pertinent immigration information provided by the 
     Immigration and Naturalization Service, including the number 
     of non-United States citizen contract workers in the CNMI, 
     based on data the Immigration and Naturalization Service may 
     require of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands 
     on a semiannual basis, or more often if deemed necessary by 
     the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
       (2) the treatment and conditions of non-United States 
     citizen contract workers, including foreign government 
     interference with workers' ability to assert their rights 
     under United States law.
       (3) the effect of laws of the Northern Mariana Islands on 
     Federal interests.
       (4) the adequacy of detention facilities in the Northern 
     Mariana Islands.
       (5) the accuracy and reliability of the computerized alien 
     identification and tracking system and its compatibility with 
     the system of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and
       (6) the reasons why Federal agencies are unable or 
     unwilling to fully and effectively enforce Federal laws 
     applicable within the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 
     Islands unless such activities are funded by the Secretary of 
     the Interior.

                    Sec. 4. Immigration Cooperation

       The Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and the 
     Immigration and Naturalization Service shall cooperate in the 
     identification and, if necessary, exclusion or deportation 
     from the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands of 
     persons who represent security or law enforcement risks to 
     the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands or the 
     United States.

       Sec. 5. Clarification of Local Employment in the Marianas

       (a) Section 8103(i) of title 46 of the United States Code 
     is amended by renumbering paragraph (3) as paragraph (4) and 
     by adding a new paragraph (3) as follows:
       ``(3) Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
     subsection, any alien allowed to be employed under the 
     immigration laws of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 
     Islands (CNMI) may serve as an unlicensed seaman on a 
     fishing, fish processing, or fish tender vessel that is 
     operated exclusively from a port within the CNMI and within 
     the navigable waters and exclusive economic zone of the 
     United States surrounding the CNMI. Purusant to 46 U.S.C. 
     8704, such persons are deemed to be employed in the United 
     States and are considered to have the permission of the 
     Attorney General of the United States to accept such 
     employment: Provided, That paragraph (2) of this subsection 
     shall not apply to persons allowed to be employed under this 
     paragraph.''.
       (b) Section 8103(i)(1) of title 46 of the United States 
     Code is amended by deleting ``paragraph (3) of this 
     subsection'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``paragraph (4) of 
     this subsection''.

     Sec. 6. Clarification of Ownership of Submerged Lands in the 
              Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

       Public Law 93-435 (88 Stat 1210), as amended, is further 
     amended by--
       (a) striking ``Guam, the Virgin Islands'' in section 1 and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``Guam, the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands'' each place the 
     words appear;
       (b) striking ``Guam, American Samoa'' in section 2 and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``Guam, the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa''; and
       (c) striking ``Guam, the Virgin Islands'' in section 2 and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``Guam, the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands.''.
       With respect to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 
     Islands, references to ``the date of enactment of this Act'' 
     or ``date of enactment of this subsection'' contained in 
     Public Law 93-435, as amended, shall mean the date of 
     enactment of this section.

               Sec. 7. Annual State of the Islands Report

       The Secretary of the Interior shall submit to the Congress, 
     annually, a ``State of the Islands'' report on American 
     Samoa, Guam, the United States Virgin Islands, the 
     Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Republic of 
     Palau, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the 
     Federated States of Micronesia that includes basic economic 
     development information, data on direct and indirect Federal 
     assistance, local revenues and expenditures, employment and 
     unemployment, the adequacy of essential infrastructure and 
     maintenance thereof, and an assessment of local financial 
     management and 

[[Page S 11853]]
     administrative capabilities, and Federal efforts to improve those 
     capabilities.

                      Sec. 8. Technical correction

       Section 501 of Public Law 95-134 (91 Stat. 1159, 1164), as 
     amended, is further amended by deleting ``the Trust Territory 
     of the Pacific Islands,'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``the 
     Republic of Palau, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the 
     Federated States of Micronesia,''.
                       TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES

                       DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

                             Forest Service

                            forest research

       For necessary expenses of forest research as authorized by 
     law, [$182,000,000] $177,000,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 1997.

                       state and private forestry

       For necessary expenses of cooperating with, and providing 
     technical and financial assistance to States, Territories, 
     possessions, and others and for forest pest management 
     activities, cooperative forestry and education and land 
     conservation activities, [$129,551,000] $128,294,000, to 
     remain available until expended, as authorized by law.

                         national forest system

       For necessary expenses of the Forest Service, not otherwise 
     provided for, for management, protection, improvement, and 
     utilization of the National Forest System, for ecosystem 
     planning, inventory, and monitoring, and for administrative 
     expenses associated with the management of funds provided 
     under the heads ``Forest Research'', ``State and Private 
     Forestry'', ``National Forest System'', ``Construction'', 
     ``Fire Protection and Emergency Suppression'', and ``Land 
     Acquisition'', [$1,266,688,000] $1,256,043,000, to remain 
     available for obligation until September 30, 1997, and 
     including 65 per centum of all monies received during the 
     prior fiscal year as fees collected under the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund Act of 1965, as amended, in accordance with 
     section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 460l-6a(i)): Provided, That 
     unobligated and unexpended balances in the National Forest 
     System account at the end of fiscal year 1995, shall be 
     merged with and made a part of the fiscal year 1996 National 
     Forest System appropriation, and shall remain available for 
     obligation until September 30, 1997: Provided further, That 
     up to $5,000,000 of the funds provided herein for road 
     maintenance shall be available for the planned obliteration 
     of roads which are no longer needed.
               fire protection and emergency suppression
                        wildland fire management
       For necessary expenses for forest fire presuppression 
     activities on National Forest System lands, for emergency 
     fire suppression on or adjacent to National Forest System 
     lands or other lands under fire protection agreement, and for 
     emergency rehabilitation of burned over National Forest 
     System lands, [$385,485,000] $385,485,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That unexpended balances 
     of amounts previously appropriated under any other headings 
     for Forest Service fire activities may be transferred to and 
     merged with this appropriation: Provided further, That such 
     funds are available for repayment of advances from other 
     appropriations accounts previously transferred for such 
     purposes.

                              construction

       For necessary expenses of the Forest Service, not otherwise 
     provided for, [$120,000,000] $186,888,000, to remain 
     available until expended, for construction and acquisition of 
     buildings and other facilities, and for construction and 
     repair of forest roads and trails by the Forest Service as 
     authorized by 16 U.S.C. 532-538 and 23 U.S.C. 101 and 205: 
     Provided, That funds becoming available in fiscal year 1996 
     under the Act of March 4, 1913 (16 U.S.C. 501) shall be 
     transferred to the General Fund of the Treasury of the United 
     States: Provided further, That not to exceed $50,000,000, to 
     remain available until expended, may be obligated for the 
     construction of forest roads by timber purchasers: Provided 
     further, That $2,500,000 of the funds appropriated herein 
     shall be available for a grant to the ``Non-Profit Citizens 
     for the Columbia Gorge Discovery Center'' for the 
     construction of the Columbia Gorge Discovery Center: Provided 
     further, That the Forest Service is authorized to grant the 
     unobligated balance of funds appropriated in fiscal year 1995 
     for the construction of the Columbia Gorge Discovery Center 
     to the ``Non-Profit Citizens for the Columbia Gorge Discovery 
     Center'' to be used for the same purpose: Provided further, 
     That the Forest Service is authorized to convey the land 
     needed for the construction of the Columbia Gorge Discovery 
     Center without cost to the ``Non-Profit Citizens for the 
     Columbia Gorge Discovery Center'': Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds originally 
     appropriated under this head in Public Law 101-512 for the 
     Forest Service share of a new research facility at the 
     University of Missouri, Columbia, shall be available for a 
     grant to the University of Missouri, as the Federal share in 
     the construction of the new facility: Provided further, That 
     agreed upon lease of space in the new facility shall be 
     provided to the Forest Service without charge for the life of 
     the building.

                            land acquisition

       For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of the 
     Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, as amended (16 
     U.S.C. 460l-4-11), including administrative expenses, and for 
     acquisition of land or waters, or interest therein, in 
     accordance with statutory authority applicable to the Forest 
     Service, [$14,600,000] $41,167,000, to be derived from the 
     Land and Water Conservation Fund, to remain available until 
     expended.

         acquisition of lands for national forests special acts

       For acquisition of lands within the exterior boundaries of 
     the Cache, Uinta, and Wasatch National Forests, Utah; the 
     Toiyabe National Forest, Nevada; and the Angeles, San 
     Bernardino, Sequoia, and Cleveland National Forests, 
     California, as authorized by law, $1,069,000, to be derived 
     from forest receipts.

            acquisition of lands to complete land exchanges

       For acquisition of lands, to be derived from funds 
     deposited by State, county, or municipal governments, public 
     school districts, or other public school authorities pursuant 
     to the Act of December 4, 1967, as amended (16 U.S.C. 484a), 
     to remain available until expended.

                         range betterment fund

       For necessary expenses of range rehabilitation, protection, 
     and improvement, 50 per centum of all moneys received during 
     the prior fiscal year, as fees for grazing domestic livestock 
     on lands in National Forests in the sixteen Western States, 
     pursuant to section 401(b)(1) of Public Law 94-579, as 
     amended, to remain available until expended, of which not to 
     exceed 6 per centum shall be available for administrative 
     expenses associated with on-the-ground range rehabilitation, 
     protection, and improvements.

    gifts, donations and bequests for forest and rangeland research

       For expenses authorized by 16 U.S.C. 1643(b), $92,000, to 
     remain available until expended, to be derived from the fund 
     established pursuant to the above Act.

               administrative provisions, forest service

       Appropriations to the Forest Service for the current fiscal 
     year shall be available for: (a) purchase of not to exceed 
     183 passenger motor vehicles of which 32 will be used 
     primarily for law enforcement purposes and of which 151 shall 
     be for replacement; acquisition of 22 passenger motor 
     vehicles from excess sources, and hire of such vehicles; 
     operation and maintenance of aircraft, the purchase of not to 
     exceed two for replacement only, and acquisition of 20 
     aircraft from excess sources; notwithstanding other 
     provisions of law, existing aircraft being replaced may be 
     sold, with proceeds derived or trade-in value used to offset 
     the purchase price for the replacement aircraft; (b) services 
     pursuant to the second sentence of section 706(a) of the 
     Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2225), and not to exceed 
     $100,000 for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109; (c) purchase, 
     erection, and alteration of buildings and other public 
     improvements (7 U.S.C. 2250); (d) acquisition of land, 
     waters, and interests therein, pursuant to the Act of August 
     3, 1956 (7 U.S.C. 428a); (e) for expenses pursuant to the 
     Volunteers in the National Forest Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 
     558a, 558d, 558a note); and (f) for debt collection contracts 
     in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3718(c).
       None of the funds made available under this Act shall be 
     obligated or expended to change the boundaries of any region, 
     to abolish any region, to move or close any regional office 
     for research, State and private forestry, or National Forest 
     System administration of the Forest Service, Department of 
     Agriculture, or to implement any reorganization, 
     ``reinvention'' or other type of organizational restructuring 
     of the Forest Service, without the consent of the House and 
     Senate Committees on Appropriations and the Committee on 
     Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry and the Committee on 
     Energy and Natural Resources in the United States Senate and 
     the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on Resources 
     in the United States House of Representatives.
       Any appropriations or funds available to the Forest Service 
     may be advanced to the Fire and Emergency Suppression 
     appropriation and may be used for forest firefighting and the 
     emergency rehabilitation of burned-over lands under its 
     jurisdiction: Provided, That no funds shall be made available 
     under this authority until funds appropriated to the 
     ``Emergency Forest Service Firefighting Fund'' shall have 
     been exhausted.
       The appropriation structure for the Forest Service may not 
     be altered without advance approval of the House and Senate 
     Committee on Appropriations.
       Funds appropriated to the Forest Service shall be available 
     for assistance to or through the Agency for International 
     Development and the Foreign Agricultural Service in 
     connection with forest and rangeland research, technical 
     information, and assistance in foreign countries, and shall 
     be available to support forestry and related natural resource 
     activities outside the United States and its territories and 
     possessions, including technical assistance, education and 
     training, and cooperation with United States and 
     international organizations.
       None of the funds made available to the Forest Service 
     under this Act shall be subject to transfer under the 
     provisions of section 702(b) of the Department of Agriculture 
     Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2257) or 7 U.S.C. 147b unless 
     the proposed transfer is approved in advance by the House and 
     Senate Committees on Appropriations in compliance with the 
     reprogramming procedures contained in House Report 103-551.
       No funds appropriated to the Forest Service shall be 
     transferred to the Working Capital Fund of the Department of 
     Agriculture 

[[Page S 11854]]
     without the approval of the Chief of the Forest Service.
       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any 
     appropriations or funds available to the Forest Service may 
     be used to disseminate program information to private and 
     public individuals and organizations through the use of 
     nonmonetary items of nominal value and to provide nonmonetary 
     awards of nominal value and to incur necessary expenses for 
     the nonmonetary recognition of private individuals and 
     organizations that make contributions to Forest Service 
     programs.
       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, money 
     collected, in advance or otherwise, by the Forest Service 
     under authority of section 101 of Public Law 93-153 (30 
     U.S.C. 185(1)) as reimbursement of administrative and other 
     costs incurred in processing pipeline right-of-way or permit 
     applications and for costs incurred in monitoring the 
     construction, operation, maintenance, and termination of any 
     pipeline and related facilities, may be used to reimburse the 
     applicable appropriation to which such costs were originally 
     charged.
       Funds available to the Forest Service shall be available to 
     conduct a program of not less than $1,000,000 for high 
     priority projects within the scope of the approved budget 
     which shall be carried out by the Youth Conservation Corps as 
     authorized by the Act of August 13, 1970, as amended by 
     Public Law 93-408.
       None of the funds available in this Act shall be used for 
     timber sale preparation using clearcutting in hardwood stands 
     in excess of 25 percent of the fiscal year 1989 harvested 
     volume in the Wayne National Forest, Ohio: Provided, That 
     this limitation shall not apply to hardwood stands damaged by 
     natural disaster: Provided further, That landscape architects 
     shall be used to maintain a visually pleasing forest.
       Any money collected from the States for fire suppression 
     assistance rendered by the Forest Service on non-Federal 
     lands not in the vicinity of National Forest System lands 
     shall be used to reimburse the applicable appropriation and 
     shall remain available until expended as the Secretary may 
     direct in conducting activities authorized by 16 U.S.C. 2101 
     (note), 2101-2110, 1606, and 2111.
       Of the funds available to the Forest Service, $1,500 is 
     available to the Chief of the Forest Service for official 
     reception and representation expenses.
       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Forest 
     Service is authorized to employ or otherwise contract with 
     persons at regular rates of pay, as determined by the 
     Service, to perform work occasioned by emergencies such as 
     fires, storms, floods, earthquakes or any other unavoidable 
     cause without regard to Sundays, Federal holidays, and the 
     regular workweek.
       To the greatest extent possible, and in accordance with the 
     Final Amendment to the Shawnee National Forest Plan, none of 
     the funds available in this Act shall be used for preparation 
     of timber sales using clearcutting or other forms of even 
     aged management in hardwood stands in the Shawnee National 
     Forest, Illinois.
       Funds appropriated to the Forest Service shall be available 
     for interactions with and providing technical assistance to 
     rural communities for sustainable rural development purposes.
       [Notwithstanding any other provision of law, eighty percent 
     of the funds appropriated to the Forest Service in the 
     National Forest System and Construction accounts and planned 
     to be allocated to activities under the ``Jobs in the Woods'' 
     program for projects on National Forest land in the State of 
     Washington may be granted directly to the Washington State 
     Department of Fish and Wildlife for accomplishment of planned 
     projects. Twenty percent of said funds shall be retained by 
     the Forest Service for planning and administering projects. 
     Project selection and prioritization shall be accomplished by 
     the Forest Service with such consultation with the State of 
     Washington as the Forest Service deems appropriate.
       [None of the funds available in this Act shall be used for 
     any activity that directly or indirectly causes harm to 
     songbirds within the boundaries of the Shawnee National 
     Forest.]
       None of the funds provided by this Act shall be used to 
     revise or implement a new Tongass Land Management Plan 
     (TLMP).
       None of the funds provided in this or any other 
     Appropriations Act may be used on the Tongass National Forest 
     except in compliance with Alternative P, identified in the 
     Tongass Land Management Plan Revision Supplement to the Draft 
     Environmental Impact Statement dated August 1991.
                          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
                 fossil energy research and development

       For necessary expenses in carrying out fossil energy 
     research and development activities, under the authority of 
     the Department of Energy Organization Act (Public Law 95-91), 
     including the acquisition of interest, including defeasible 
     and equitable interests in any real property or any facility 
     or for plant or facility acquisition or expansion, 
     [$379,524,000] $376,181,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That no part of the sum herein made 
     available shall be used for the field testing of nuclear 
     explosives in the recovery of oil and gas.

                      alternative fuels production


                     (including transfer of funds)

       Monies received as investment income on the principal 
     amount in the Great Plains Project Trust at the Norwest Bank 
     of North Dakota, in such sums as are earned as of October 1, 
     1995, shall be deposited in this account and immediately 
     transferred to the General Fund of the Treasury. Monies 
     received as revenue sharing from the operation of the Great 
     Plains Gasification Plant shall be immediately transferred to 
     the General Fund of the Treasury.

                 naval petroleum and oil shale reserves

       For necessary expenses in carrying out naval petroleum and 
     oil shale reserve activities, $136,028,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That the requirements of 
     10 U.S.C. 7430(b)(2)(B) shall not apply to fiscal year 1996: 
     Provided further, That section 501 of Public Law 101-45 is 
     hereby repealed.

                          energy conservation

       For necessary expenses in carrying out energy conservation 
     activities, [$556,371,000] $576,976,000, to remain available 
     until expended, including, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, the excess amount for fiscal year 1996 
     determined under the provisions of section 3003(d) of Public 
     Law 99-509 (15 U.S.C. 4502), and of which $16,000,000 shall 
     be derived from available unobligated balances in the Biomass 
     Energy Development account: Provided, That [$148,946,000] 
     $168,946,000 shall be for use in energy conservation programs 
     as defined in section 3008(3) of Public Law 99-509 (15 U.S.C. 
     4507) and shall not be available until excess amounts are 
     determined under the provisions of section 3003(d) of Public 
     Law 99-509 (15 U.S.C. 4502): Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding section 3003(d)(2) of Public Law 99-509 such 
     sums shall be allocated to the eligible programs as follows: 
     [$110,946,000] $137,446,000 for the weatherization assistance 
     program and [$26,500,000] $31,500,000 for the State energy 
     conservation program.

                          economic regulation

       For necessary expenses in carrying out the activities of 
     the Economic Regulatory Administration and the Office of 
     Hearings and Appeals, [$6,297,000] $8,038,000, to remain 
     available until expended.

                      strategic petroleum reserve


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses for Strategic Petroleum Reserve 
     facility development and operations and program management 
     activities pursuant to the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
     of 1975, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6201 et seq.), $287,000,000, 
     to remain available until expended, of which $187,000,000 
     shall be derived by transfer of unobligated balances from the 
     ``SPR petroleum account'' and $100,000,000 shall be derived 
     by transfer from the ``SPR Decommissioning Fund'': Provided, 
     That notwithstanding section 161 of the Energy Policy and 
     Conservation Act, the Secretary shall draw down and sell up 
     to seven million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum 
     Reserve: Provided further, That the proceeds from the sale 
     shall be deposited into a special account in the Treasury, to 
     be established and known as the ``SPR Decommissioning Fund'', 
     and shall be available for the purpose of removal of oil from 
     and decommissioning of the Weeks Island site and for other 
     purposes related to the operations of the Strategic Petroleum 
     Reserve.

                         spr petroleum account
       [Notwithstanding 42 U.S.C. 6240(d) the United States share 
     of crude oil in Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 (Elk 
     Hills) may be sold or otherwise disposed of to other than the 
     Strategic Petroleum Reserve: Provided, That outlays in fiscal 
     year 1996 resulting from the use of funds in this account 
     shall not exceed $5,000,000.]
       Notwithstanding 42 U.S.C. 6240(d) the United States share 
     of crude oil in Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 may be 
     sold or otherwise disposed of to other than the Strategic 
     Petroleum Reserve: Provided, That outlays in fiscal year 1996 
     resulting from the use of funds in this account shall not 
     exceed $5,000,000.
                   energy information administration

       For necessary expenses in carrying out the activities of 
     the Energy Information Administration, [$79,766,000] 
     $64,766,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That notwithstanding Section 4(d) of the Service Contract Act 
     of 1965 (41 U.S.C. 353(d)) or any other provision of law, 
     funds appropriated under this heading hereafter may be used 
     to enter into a contract for end use consumption surveys for 
     a term not to exceed eight years: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, hereafter the 
     Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey shall be conducted on 
     a triennial basis.

            administrative provisions, department of energy

       Appropriations under this Act for the current fiscal year 
     shall be available for hire of passenger motor vehicles; 
     hire, maintenance, and operation of aircraft; purchase, 
     repair, and cleaning of uniforms; and reimbursement to the 
     General Services Administration for security guard services.
       From appropriations under this Act, transfers of sums may 
     be made to other agencies of the Government for the 
     performance of work for which the appropriation is made.
       None of the funds made available to the Department of 
     Energy under this Act shall be used to implement or finance 
     authorized price support or loan guarantee programs unless 
     specific provision is made for such programs in an 
     appropriations Act.
       The Secretary is authorized to accept lands, buildings, 
     equipment, and other contributions from public and private 
     sources 

[[Page S 11855]]
     and to prosecute projects in cooperation with other agencies, Federal, 
     State, private, or foreign: Provided, That revenues and other 
     moneys received by or for the account of the Department of 
     Energy or otherwise generated by sale of products in 
     connection with projects of the Department appropriated under 
     this Act may be retained by the Secretary of Energy, to be 
     available until expended, and used only for plant 
     construction, operation, costs, and payments to cost-sharing 
     entities as provided in appropriate cost-sharing contracts or 
     agreements: Provided further, That the remainder of revenues 
     after the making of such payments shall be covered into the 
     Treasury as miscellaneous receipts: Provided further, That 
     any contract, agreement, or provision thereof entered into by 
     the Secretary pursuant to this authority shall not be 
     executed prior to the expiration of 30 calendar days (not 
     including any day in which either House of Congress is not in 
     session because of adjournment of more than three calendar 
     days to a day certain) from the receipt by the Speaker of the 
     House of Representatives and the President of the Senate of a 
     full comprehensive report on such project, including the 
     facts and circumstances relied upon in support of the 
     proposed project.
       No funds provided in this Act may be expended by the 
     Department of Energy to prepare, issue, or process 
     procurement documents for programs or projects for which 
     appropriations have not been made.

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

                         Indian Health Service

                         indian health services

       For expenses necessary to carry out the Act of August 5, 
     1954 (68 Stat. 674), the Indian Self-Determination Act, the 
     Indian Health Care Improvement Act, and titles II and III of 
     the Public Health Service Act with respect to the Indian 
     Health Service, [$1,725,792,000] $1,815,373,000 together with 
     payments received during the fiscal year pursuant to 42 
     U.S.C. 300aaa-2 for services furnished by the Indian Health 
     Service: Provided, That funds made available to tribes and 
     tribal organizations through contracts, grant agreements, or 
     any other agreements or compacts authorized by the Indian 
     Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975 (88 
     Stat. 2203; 25 U.S.C. 450), shall be deemed to be obligated 
     at the time of the grant or contract award and thereafter 
     shall remain available to the tribe or tribal organization 
     without fiscal year limitation: Provided further, That 
     $12,000,000 shall remain available until expended, for the 
     Indian Catastrophic Health Emergency Fund: Provided further, 
     That [$351,258,000] $350,564,000 for contract medical care 
     shall remain available for obligation until September 30, 
     1997: Provided further, That of the funds provided, not less 
     than $11,306,000 shall be used to carry out the loan 
     repayment program under section 108 of the Indian Health Care 
     Improvement Act, as amended: Provided further, That funds 
     provided in this Act may be used for one-year contracts and 
     grants which are to be performed in two fiscal years, so long 
     as the total obligation is recorded in the year for which the 
     funds are appropriated: Provided further, That the amounts 
     collected by the Secretary of Health and Human Services under 
     the authority of title IV of the Indian Health Care 
     Improvement Act shall be available for two fiscal years after 
     the fiscal year in which they were collected, for the purpose 
     of achieving compliance with the applicable conditions and 
     requirements of titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security 
     Act (exclusive of planning, design, or construction of new 
     facilities): Provided further, That of the funds provided, 
     $7,500,000 shall remain available until expended, for the 
     Indian Self-Determination Fund, which shall be available for 
     the transitional costs of initial or expanded tribal 
     contracts, grants or cooperative agreements with the Indian 
     Health Service under the provisions of the Indian Self-
     Determination Act: Provided further, That funding contained 
     herein, and in any earlier appropriations Acts for 
     scholarship programs under the Indian Health Care Improvement 
     Act (25 U.S.C. 1613) shall remain available for obligation 
     until September 30, 1997: Provided further, That amounts 
     received by tribes and tribal organizations under title IV of 
     the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, as amended, shall be 
     reported and accounted for and available to the receiving 
     tribes and tribal organizations until expended.

                        indian health facilities

       For construction, repair, maintenance, improvement, and 
     equipment of health and related auxiliary facilities, 
     including quarters for personnel; preparation of plans, 
     specifications, and drawings; acquisition of sites, purchase 
     and erection of modular buildings, and purchases of trailers; 
     and for provision of domestic and community sanitation 
     facilities for Indians, as authorized by section 7 of the Act 
     of August 5, 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2004a), the Indian Self-
     Determination Act and the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, 
     and for expenses necessary to carry out the Act of August 5, 
     1954 (68 Stat. 674), the Indian Self-Determination Act, the 
     Indian Health Care Improvement Act, and titles II and III of 
     the Public Health Service Act with respect to environmental 
     health and facilities support activities of the Indian Health 
     Service, [$236,975,000] $151,227,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, funds appropriated for the planning, 
     design, construction or renovation of health facilities for 
     the benefit of an Indian tribe or tribes may be used to 
     purchase land for sites to construct, improve, or enlarge 
     health or related facilities.

            administrative provisions, indian health service

       Appropriations in this Act to the Indian Health Service 
     shall be available for services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 
     3109 but at rates not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent 
     to the maximum rate payable for senior-level positions under 
     5 U.S.C. 5376; hire of passenger motor vehicles and aircraft; 
     purchase of medical equipment; purchase of reprints; 
     purchase, renovation and erection of modular buildings and 
     renovation of existing facilities; payments for telephone 
     service in private residences in the field, when authorized 
     under regulations approved by the Secretary; and for uniforms 
     or allowances therefor as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-
     5902); and for expenses of attendance at meetings which are 
     concerned with the functions or activities for which the 
     appropriation is made or which will contribute to improved 
     conduct, supervision, or management of those functions or 
     activities: Provided, That in accordance with the provisions 
     of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, non-Indian 
     patients may be extended health care at all tribally 
     administered or Indian Health Service facilities, subject to 
     charges, and the proceeds along with funds recovered under 
     the Federal Medical Care Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 2651-53) 
     shall be credited to the account of the facility providing 
     the service and shall be available without fiscal year 
     limitation: Provided further, That notwithstanding any other 
     law or regulation, funds transferred from the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development to the Indian Health Service 
     shall be administered under Public Law 86-121 (the Indian 
     Sanitation Facilities Act) and Public Law 93-638, as amended: 
     Provided further, That funds appropriated to the Indian 
     Health Service in this Act, except those used for 
     administrative and program direction purposes, shall not be 
     subject to limitations directed at curtailing Federal travel 
     and transportation: Provided further, That the Indian Health 
     Service shall neither bill nor charge those Indians who may 
     have the economic means to pay unless and until such time as 
     Congress has agreed upon a specific policy to do so and has 
     directed the Indian Health Service to implement such a 
     policy: Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, funds previously or herein made available 
     to a tribe or tribal organization through a contract, grant 
     or agreement authorized by Title I of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975 (88 Stat. 
     2203; 25 U.S.C. 450), may be deobligated and reobligated to a 
     self-governance funding agreement under Title III of the 
     Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 
     1975 and thereafter shall remain available to the tribe or 
     tribal organization without fiscal year limitation: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds made available to the Indian 
     Health Service in this Act shall be used to implement the 
     final rule published in the Federal Register on September 16, 
     1987, by the Department of Health and Human Services, 
     relating to eligibility for the health care services of the 
     Indian Health Service until the Indian Health Service has 
     submitted a budget request reflecting the increased costs 
     associated with the proposed final rule, and such request has 
     been included in an appropriations Act and enacted into law: 
     Provided further, That funds made available in this Act are 
     to be apportioned to the Indian Health Service as 
     appropriated in this Act, and accounted for in the 
     appropriation structure set forth in this Act: Provided 
     further, That the appropriation structure for the Indian 
     Health Service may not be altered without advance approval of 
     the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.
                        DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

              Office of Elementary and Secondary Education

                            indian education

       For necessary expenses to carry out, to the extent not 
     otherwise provided, title IX, part A, subpart 1 of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended, 
     and section 215 of the Department of Education Organization 
     Act, [$52,500,000] $54,660,000.

                         OTHER RELATED AGENCIES

              Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Navajo and Hopi 
     Indian Relocation as authorized by Public Law 93-531, 
     [$21,345,000] $20,345,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That funds provided in this or any other 
     appropriations Act are to be used to relocate eligible 
     individuals and groups including evictees from District 6, 
     Hopi-partitioned lands residents, those in significantly 
     substandard housing, and all others certified as eligible and 
     not included in the preceding categories: Provided further, 
     That none of the funds contained in this or any other Act may 
     be used by the Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation to 
     evict any single Navajo or Navajo family who, as of November 
     30, 1985, was physically domiciled on the lands partitioned 
     to the Hopi Tribe unless a new or replacement home is 
     provided for such household: Provided further, That no 
     relocatee will be provided with more than one new or 
     replacement home: Provided further, That the Office shall 
     relocate any certified eligible relocatees who have selected 
     and received an approved homesite on 

[[Page S 11856]]
     the Navajo reservation or selected a replacement residence off the 
     Navajo reservation or on the land acquired pursuant to 25 
     U.S.C. 640d-10.

    Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts 
                              Development


                        payment to the institute

       For payment to the Institute of American Indian and Alaska 
     Native Culture and Arts Development, as authorized by title 
     XV of Public Law 99-498 (20 U.S.C. 4401 et seq.), $5,500,000.

                        Smithsonian Institution

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Smithsonian Institution, as 
     authorized by law, including research in the fields of art, 
     science, and history; development, preservation, and 
     documentation of the National Collections; presentation of 
     public exhibits and performances; collection, preparation, 
     dissemination, and exchange of information and publications; 
     conduct of education, training, and museum assistance 
     programs; maintenance, alteration, operation, lease (for 
     terms not to exceed thirty years), and protection of 
     buildings, facilities, and approaches; not to exceed $100,000 
     for services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; up to 5 
     replacement passenger vehicles; purchase, rental, repair, and 
     cleaning of uniforms for employees; [$309,471,000] 
     $307,988,000, of which not to exceed [$32,000,000] 
     $30,472,000 for the instrumentation program, collections 
     acquisition, Museum Support Center equipment and move, 
     exhibition reinstallation, the National Museum of the 
     American Indian, the repatriation of skeletal remains 
     program, research equipment, information management, and 
     Latino programming shall remain available until expended and, 
     including such funds as may be necessary to support American 
     overseas research centers and a total of $125,000 for the 
     Council of American Overseas Research Centers: Provided, That 
     funds appropriated herein are available for advance payments 
     to independent contractors performing research services or 
     participating in official Smithsonian presentations.

        construction and improvements, national zoological park

       For necessary expenses of planning, construction, 
     remodeling, and equipping of buildings and facilities at the 
     National Zoological Park, by contract or otherwise, 
     [$3,000,000] $3,250,000, to remain available until expended.

                  repair and restoration of buildings

       For necessary expenses of repair and restoration of 
     buildings owned or occupied by the Smithsonian Institution, 
     by contract or otherwise, as authorized by section 2 of the 
     Act of August 22, 1949 (63 Stat. 623), including not to 
     exceed $10,000 for services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, 
     [$24,954,000] $33,954,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That contracts awarded for environmental 
     systems, protection systems, and exterior repair or 
     restoration of buildings of the Smithsonian Institution may 
     be negotiated with selected contractors and awarded on the 
     basis of contractor qualifications as well as price.

                              construction

       For necessary expenses for construction, [$12,950,000] 
     $27,700,000, to remain available until expended[. Provided, 
     That notwithstanding any other provision of law, a single 
     procurement for the construction of the National Museum of 
     the American Indian Cultural Resources Center may be issued 
     which includes the full scope of the project: Provided 
     further, That the solicitation and the contract shall contain 
     the clause ``availability of funds'' found at 48 CFR 
     52.232.18].

                        National Gallery of Art


                         salaries and expenses

       For the upkeep and operations of the National Gallery of 
     Art, the protection and care of the works of art therein, and 
     administrative expenses incident thereto, as authorized by 
     the Act of March 24, 1937 (50 Stat. 51), as amended by the 
     public resolution of April 13, 1939 (Public Resolution 9, 
     Seventy-sixth Congress), including services as authorized by 
     5 U.S.C. 3109; payment in advance when authorized by the 
     treasurer of the Gallery for membership in library, museum, 
     and art associations or societies whose publications or 
     services are available to members only, or to members at a 
     price lower than to the general public; purchase, repair, and 
     cleaning of uniforms for guards, and uniforms, or allowances 
     therefor, for other employees as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 
     5901-5902); purchase or rental of devices and services for 
     protecting buildings and contents thereof, and maintenance, 
     alteration, improvement, and repair of buildings, approaches, 
     and grounds; and purchase of services for restoration and 
     repair of works of art for the National Gallery of Art by 
     contracts made, without advertising, with individuals, firms, 
     or organizations at such rates or prices and under such terms 
     and conditions as the Gallery may deem proper, [$51,315,000] 
     $51,844,000, of which not to exceed $3,026,000 for the 
     special exhibition program shall remain available until 
     expended.


            repair, restoration and renovation of buildings

       For necessary expenses of repair, restoration and 
     renovation of buildings, grounds and facilities owned or 
     occupied by the National Gallery of Art, by contract or 
     otherwise, as authorized [$5,500,000] $7,385,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That contracts awarded 
     for environmental systems, protection systems, and exterior 
     repair or renovation of buildings of the National Gallery of 
     Art may be negotiated with selected contractors and awarded 
     on the basis of contractor qualifications as well as price.

             John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts

                       operations and maintenance

       For necessary expenses for the operation, maintenance and 
     security of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing 
     Arts, [$9,800,000] $10,323,000: Provided, That 40 U.S.C. 193n 
     is hereby amended by striking the word ``and'' after the word 
     ``Institution'' and inserting in lieu thereof a comma, and by 
     inserting ``and the Trustees of the John F. Kennedy Center 
     for the Performing Arts,'' after the word ``Art,''.

                              construction

       For necessary expenses of capital repair and rehabilitation 
     of the existing features of the building and site of the John 
     F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, $8,983,000, to 
     remain available until expended.

            Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars


                         salaries and expenses

       For expenses necessary in carrying out the provisions of 
     the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Act of 1968 (82 Stat. 1356) 
     including hire of passenger vehicles and services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, [$5,140,100] $6,537,000.

           National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities

                    National Endowment for the Arts


                       grants and administration

       For necessary expenses to carry out the National Foundation 
     on the Arts and Humanities Act of 1965, as amended, 
     $82,259,000[, subject to passage by the House of 
     Representatives of a bill authorizing such appropriation,] 
     shall be available to the National Endowment for the Arts for 
     the support of projects and productions in the arts through 
     assistance to groups and individuals pursuant to section 5(c) 
     of the Act, and for administering the functions of the Act, 
     to remain available until September 30, 1997.


                            matching grants

       To carry out the provisions of section 10(a)(2) of the 
     National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 
     1965, as amended, $17,235,000[, subject to passage by the 
     House of Representatives of a bill authorizing such 
     appropriation,] to remain available until September 30, 1997, 
     to the National Endowment for the Arts, of which $7,500,000 
     shall be available for purposes of section 5(p)(1): Provided, 
     That this appropriation shall be available for obligation 
     only in such amounts as may be equal to the total amounts of 
     gifts, bequests, and devises of money, and other property 
     accepted by the Chairman or by grantees of the Endowment 
     under the provisions of section 10(a)(2), subsections 
     11(a)(2)(A) and 11(a)(3)(A) during the current and preceding 
     fiscal years for which equal amounts have not previously been 
     appropriated.

                 National Endowment for the Humanities


                       grants and administration

       For necessary expenses to carry out the National Foundation 
     on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965, as amended, 
     [$82,469,000] $96,494,000 shall be available to the National 
     Endowment for the Humanities for support of activities in the 
     humanities, pursuant to section 7(c) of the Act, and for 
     administering the functions of the Act, to remain available 
     until September 30, 1997.


                            matching grants

       To carry out the provisions of section 10(a)(2) of the 
     National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 
     1965, as amended, [$17,025,000] $18,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 1997, of which [$9,180,000] 
     $10,000,000 shall be available to the National Endowment for 
     the Humanities for the purposes of section 7(h): Provided, 
     That this appropriation shall be available for obligation 
     only in such amounts as may be equal to the total amounts of 
     gifts, bequests, and devises of money, and other property 
     accepted by the Chairman or by grantees of the Endowment 
     under the provisions of subsections 11(a)(2)(B) and 
     11(a)(3)(B) during the current and preceding fiscal years for 
     which equal amounts have not previously been appropriated.

                      Institute of Museum Services

                       grants and administration

       For carrying out title II of the Arts, Humanities, and 
     Cultural Affairs Act of 1976, as amended, $21,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 1997.

                       administrative provisions

       None of the funds appropriated to the National Foundation 
     on the Arts and the Humanities may be used to process any 
     grant or contract documents which do not include the text of 
     18 U.S.C. 1913: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated 
     to the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities may 
     be used for official reception and representation expenses.
                        Commission of Fine Arts

                         salaries and expenses

       For expenses made necessary by the Act establishing a 
     Commission of Fine Arts (40 U.S.C. 104), $834,000.

               national capital arts and cultural affairs

       For necessary expenses as authorized by Public Law 99-190 
     (99 Stat. 1261; 20 U.S.C. 956(a)), as amended, $6,000,000.
     
[[Page S 11857]]


               Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

                         salaries and expenses

       For expenses necessary for the Advisory Council on Historic 
     Preservation, [$3,063,000] $2,500,000.

                  National Capital Planning Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses, as authorized by the National 
     Capital Planning Act of 1952 (40 U.S.C. 71-71i), including 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $5,090,000: 
     Provided, That all appointed members will be compensated at a 
     rate not to exceed the rate for Executive Schedule Level IV.

             Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Franklin Delano Roosevelt 
     Memorial Commission, established by the Act of August 11, 
     1955 (69 Stat. 694), as amended by Public Law 92-332 (86 
     Stat. 401), [$48,000] $147,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 1997.

              Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation
                         [salaries and expenses

       [For necessary expenses for the orderly closure of the 
     Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation, $2,000,000.]
                           public development

       Funds made available under this heading in prior years 
     shall be available for operating and administrative expenses 
     of the Corporation.
                United States Holocaust Memorial Council

                       holocaust memorial council

       For expenses of the Holocaust Memorial Council, as 
     authorized by Public Law 96-388, as amended, [$28,707,000] 
     $26,609,000; of which $1,575,000 for the Museum's repair and 
     rehabilitation program [and $1,264,000 for the Museum's 
     exhibition program] shall remain available until expended.
                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 301. The expenditure of any appropriation under this 
     Act for any consulting service through procurement contract, 
     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3109, shall be limited to those 
     contracts where such expenditures are a matter of public 
     record and available for public inspection, except where 
     otherwise provided under existing law, or under existing 
     Executive order issued pursuant to existing law.
       Sec. 302. No part of any appropriation under this Act shall 
     be available to the Secretary of the Interior or the 
     Secretary of Agriculture for the leasing of oil and natural 
     gas by noncompetitive bidding on publicly owned lands within 
     the boundaries of the Shawnee National Forest, Illinois: 
     Provided, That nothing herein is intended to inhibit or 
     otherwise affect the sale, lease, or right to access to 
     minerals owned by private individuals.
       Sec. 303. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall be available for any activity or the publication or 
     distribution of literature that in any way tends to promote 
     public support or opposition to any legislative proposal on 
     which congressional action is not complete.
       Sec. 304. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current 
     fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
       Sec. 305. None of the funds provided in this Act to any 
     department or agency shall be obligated or expended to 
     provide a personal cook, chauffeur, or other personal 
     servants to any officer or employee of such department or 
     agency except as otherwise provided by law.
       Sec. 306. No assessments may be levied against any program, 
     budget activity, subactivity, or project funded by this Act 
     unless notice of such assessments and the basis therefor are 
     presented to the Committees on Appropriations and are 
     approved by such Committees.
       Sec. 307. (a) Compliance With Buy American Act.--None of 
     the funds made available in this Act may be expended by an 
     entity unless the entity agrees that in expending the funds 
     the entity will comply with sections 2 through 4 of the Act 
     of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c; popularly known as the 
     ``Buy American Act'').
       (b) Sense of Congress; Requirement Regarding Notice.--
       (1) Purchase of american-made equipment and products.--In 
     the case of any equipment or product that may be authorized 
     to be purchased with financial assistance provided using 
     funds made available in this Act, it is the sense of the 
     Congress that entities receiving the assistance should, in 
     expending the assistance, purchase only American-made 
     equipment and products.
       (2) Notice to recipients of assistance.--In providing 
     financial assistance using funds made available in this Act, 
     the head of each Federal agency shall provide to each 
     recipient of the assistance a notice describing the statement 
     made in paragraph (1) by the Congress.
       (c) Prohibition of Contracts With Persons Falsely Labeling 
     Products as Made in America.--If it has been finally 
     determined by a court or Federal agency that any person 
     intentionally affixed a label bearing a ``Made in America'' 
     inscription, or any inscription with the same meaning, to any 
     product sold in or shipped to the United States that is not 
     made in the United States, the person shall be ineligible to 
     receive any contract or subcontract made with funds made 
     available in this Act, pursuant to the debarment, suspension, 
     and ineligibility procedures described in sections 9.400 
     through 9.409 of title 48, Code of Federal Regulations.
       Sec. 308. None of the funds in this Act may be used to 
     plan, prepare, or offer for sale timber from trees classified 
     as giant sequoia (sequoiadendron giganteum) which are located 
     on National Forest System or Bureau of Land Management lands 
     in a manner different than such sales were conducted in 
     fiscal year 1995.
       Sec. 309. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be obligated or expended by the National Park Service to 
     enter into or implement a concession contract which permits 
     or requires the removal of the underground lunchroom at the 
     Carlsbad Caverns National Park.
       Sec. 310. Where the actual costs of construction projects 
     under self-determination contracts, compacts, or grants, 
     pursuant to Public Laws 93-638, [100-413] 103-413, or 100-
     297, are less than the estimated costs thereof, use of the 
     resulting excess funds shall be determined by the appropriate 
     Secretary after consultation with the tribes.
       Sec. 311. Notwithstanding Public Law 103-413, quarterly 
     payments of funds to tribes and tribal organizations under 
     annual funding agreements pursuant to section 108 of Public 
     Law 93-638, as amended, may be made on the first business day 
     following the first day of a fiscal quarter.
       [Sec. 312. None of funds in this Act may be used for the 
     Americorps program.]
       Sec. 312. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act may be used for the AmeriCorps program.
       [Sec. 313. (a) On or before April 1, 1996, the Pennsylvania 
     Avenue Development Corporation shall--
       [(1) transfer and assign in accordance with this section 
     all of its rights, title, and interest in and to all of the 
     leases, covenants, agreements, and easements it has executed 
     or will execute by March 31, 1996, in carrying out its powers 
     and duties under the Pennsylvania Avenue Development 
     Corporation Act (40 U.S.C. 871-885) and the Federal Triangle 
     Development Act (40 U.S.C. 1101-1109) to the General Services 
     Administration, National Capital Planning Commission, or the 
     National Park Service; and
       [(2) except as provided by subsection (d), transfer all 
     rights, title, and interest in and to all property, both real 
     and personal, held in the name of the Pennsylvania Avenue 
     Development Corporation to the General Services 
     Administration.
       [(b) The responsibilities of the Pennsylvania Avenue 
     Development Corporation transferred to the General Services 
     Administration under subsection (a) include, but are not 
     limited to, the following:
       [(1) Collection of revenue owed the Federal Government as a 
     result of real estate sales or lease agreements entered into 
     by the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation and 
     private parties, including, at a minimum, with respect to the 
     following projects:
       [(A) The Willard Hotel property on Square 225.
       [(B) The Gallery Row project on Square 457.
       [(C) The Lansburgh's project on Square 431.
       [(D) The Market Square North project on Square 407.
       [(2) Collection of sale or lease revenue owed the Federal 
     Government (if any) in the event two undeveloped sites owned 
     by the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation on Squares 
     457 and 406 are sold or leased prior to April 1, 1996.
       [(3) Application of collected revenue to repay United 
     States Treasury debt incurred by the Pennsylvania Avenue 
     Development Corporation in the course of acquiring real 
     estate.
       [(4) Performing financial audits for projects in which the 
     Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation has actual or 
     potential revenue expectation, as identified in paragraphs 
     (1) and (2), in accordance with procedures describe in 
     applicable sale or lease agreements.
       [(5) Disposition of real estate properties which are or 
     become available for sale and lease or other uses.
       [(6) Payment of benefits in accordance with the Uniform 
     Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisitions Policies 
     Act of 1970 to which persons in the project area squares are 
     entitled as a result of the Pennsylvania Avenue Development 
     Corporation's acquisition of real estate.
       [(7) Carrying out the responsibilities of the Pennsylvania 
     Avenue Development Corporation under the Federal Triangle 
     Development Act (40 U.S.C. 1101-1109), including 
     responsibilities for managing assets and liabilities of the 
     Corporation under such Act.
       [(c) In carrying out the responsibilities of the 
     Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation transferred under 
     this section, the Administrator of the General Services 
     Administration shall have the following powers:
       [(1) To acquire lands, improvements, and properties by 
     purchase, lease or exchange, and to sell, lease, or otherwise 
     dispose of real or personal property as necessary to complete 
     the development plan developed under section 5 of the 
     Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation Act of 1972 (40 
     U.S.C. 874) if a notice of intention to carry out such 
     acquisition or disposal is first transmitted to the Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Environment and Public 

[[Page S 11858]]
     Works and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and at least 60 
     days elapse after the date of such transmission.
       [(2) To modify from time to time the plan referred to in 
     paragraph (1) if such modification is first transmitted to 
     the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the 
     Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and the Committee on Environment and Public Works and the 
     Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and at least 60 
     days elapse after the date of such transmission.
       [(3) To maintain any existing Pennsylvania Avenue 
     Development Corporation insurance programs.
       [(4) To enter into and perform such leases, contracts, or 
     other transactions with any agency or instrumentality of the 
     United States, the several States, or the District of 
     Columbia or with any person, firm, association, or 
     corporation as may be necessary to carry out the 
     responsibilities of the Pennsylvania Avenue Development 
     Corporation under the Federal Triangle Development Act (40 
     U.S.C. 1101-1109).
       [(5) To request the Council of the District of Columbia to 
     close any alleys necessary for the completion of development 
     in Square 457.
       [(6) To use all of the funds transferred from the 
     Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation or income earned 
     on Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation property to 
     complete any pending development projects.
       [(d)(1)(A) On or before April 1, 1996, the Pennsylvania 
     Avenue Development Corporation shall transfer all its right, 
     title, and interest in and to the property described in 
     subparagraph (B) to the National Park Service, Department of 
     the Interior.
       [(B) The property referred to in subparagraph (A) is the 
     property located within the Pennsylvania Avenue National 
     Historic Site depicted on a map entitled ``Pennsylvania 
     Avenue National Historic Park'', dated June 1, 1995, and 
     numbered 840-82441, which shall be on file and available for 
     public inspection in the offices of the National Park 
     Service, Department of the Interior. The Pennsylvania Avenue 
     National Historic Site includes the parks, plazas, sidewalks, 
     special lighting, trees, sculpture, and memorials.
       [(2) Jurisdiction of Pennsylvania Avenue and all other 
     roadways from curb to curb shall remain with the District of 
     Columbia but vendors shall not be permitted to occupy street 
     space except during temporary special events.
       [(3) The National Park Service shall be responsible for 
     management, administration, maintenance, law enforcement, 
     visitor services, resource protection, interpretation, and 
     historic preservation at the Pennsylvania Avenue National 
     Historic Site.
       [(4) The National Park Service may enter into contracts, 
     cooperative agreements, or other transactions with any agency 
     or instrumentality of the United States, the several States, 
     or the District of Columbia or with any person, firm, 
     association, or corporation as may be deemed necessary or 
     appropriate for the conduct of special events, festivals, 
     concerts, or other art and cultural programs at the 
     Pennsylvania Avenue National Historic Site or may establish a 
     nonprofit foundation to solicit funds for such activities.
       [(e) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     responsibility for ensuring that development or redevelopment 
     in the Pennsylvania Avenue area is carried out in accordance 
     with the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation Plan--
     1974, as amended, is transferred to the National Capital 
     Planning Commission or its successor commencing April 1, 
     1996.
       [(f) Savings Provisions.--
       [(1) Regulations.--Any regulations prescribed by the 
     Corporation in connection with the Pennsylvania Avenue 
     Development Corporation Act of 1972 (40 U.S.C. 871-885) and 
     the Federal Triangle Development Act (40 U.S.C. 1101-1109) 
     shall continue in effect until suspended by regulations 
     prescribed by the Administrator of the General Services 
     Administration.
       [(2) Existing rights, duties, and obligations not 
     affected.--Subsection (a) shall not be construed as affecting 
     the validity of any right, duty, or obligation of the United 
     States or any other person arising under or pursuant to any 
     contract, loan, or other instrument or agreement which was in 
     effect on the day before the date of the transfers under 
     subsection (a).
       [(3) Continuation of suits.--No action or other proceeding 
     commenced by or against the Corporation in connection with 
     administration of the Pennsylvania Avenue Development 
     Corporation Act of 1972 (40 U.S.C. 871-885) and the Federal 
     Triangle Development Act (40 U.S.C. 1101-1109) shall abate by 
     reason of enactment and implementation of this Act, except 
     that the General Services Administration shall be substituted 
     for the Corporation as a party to any such action or 
     proceeding.
       [(g) Section 3(b) of the Pennsylvania Avenue Development 
     Corporation Act of 1972 (40 U.S.C. 872(b)) is amended as 
     follows:
       [``(b) The Corporation shall be dissolved on April 1, 1996. 
     Upon dissolution, assets, obligations, and indebtedness of 
     the Corporation shall be transferred in accordance with the 
     Department of the Interior and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 1996.''.
       [Sec. 314. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), no 
     part of any appropriation contained in this Act or any other 
     Act shall be obligated or expended for the operation or 
     implementation of the Interior Columbia River Basin Ecoregion 
     Assessment Project (hereinafter ``Project'').
       [(b) From the funds appropriated to the Forest Service and 
     the Bureau of Land Management, $600,000 is made available to 
     publish by January 1, 1996, for peer review and public 
     comment, the scientific information collected, and analysis 
     undertaken, by the Project prior to the date of enactment of 
     this Act concerning forest health conditions and forest 
     management needs related to those conditions.
       [(c)(1) From the funds appropriated to the Forest Service, 
     the Secretary of Agriculture (hereinafter ``Secretary'') 
     shall--
       [(A) review the land and resource management plan 
     (hereinafter ``plan'') for each national forest within the 
     area encompassed by the Project and any policy which is 
     applicable to such plan (whether or not such policy is final 
     or draft, or has been added to such plan by amendment), which 
     is or is intended to be of limited duration, and which the 
     Project was tasked to address; and
       [(B) determine whether such policy modified to meet the 
     specific conditions of such national forest, or another 
     policy which serves the purpose of such policy, should be 
     adopted for such national forest.
       [(2) If the Secretary makes a decision that such a modified 
     or alternative policy should be adopted for such national 
     forest, the Secretary shall prepare and adopt for the plan 
     for such national forest an amendment which contains such 
     policy, which is directed solely to and affects only such 
     plan, and which addresses the specific conditions of the 
     national forest and the relationship of such policy to such 
     conditions.
       [(3) To the maximum extent practicable, any amendment 
     prepared pursuant to paragraph (2) shall establish procedures 
     to develop site-specific standards in lieu of imposing 
     general standards applicable to multiple sites. Any amendment 
     which would result in any change in land allocations within 
     the plan or reduce the likelihood of achievement of the goals 
     and objectives of the plan (prior to any previous amendment 
     incorporating in the plan any policy referred to in paragraph 
     (1)(A)) shall be deemed a significant plan amendment pursuant 
     to section 6(f)(4) of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable 
     Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604(f)(4)).
       [(4) Any amendment prepared pursuant to paragraph (2) which 
     adopts a modified or alternative policy to substitute for a 
     policy referred to in paragraph (1)(A) which has undergone 
     consultation pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species 
     Act of 1973 shall not again be subject to the consultation 
     provisions of such section 7. No further consultation shall 
     be undertaken on any policy referred to in paragraph (1)(A).
       [(5) Any amendment prepared pursuant to paragraph (2) shall 
     be adopted on or before March 31, 1996: Provided, That any 
     amendment deemed a significant amendment pursuant to 
     paragraph (3) shall be adopted on or before June 30, 1996.
       [(6) No policy referred to in paragraph (1)(A) shall be 
     effective on or after April 1, 1996.]
       Sec. 314. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), no part 
     of any appropriation contained in this Act or any other Act 
     shall be obligated or expended for the operation or 
     implementation of the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem 
     Management Project (hereinafter ``Project'').
       (b) From the funds appropriated to the Forest Service and 
     Bureau of Land Management, a sum of $1,600,000 is made 
     available for the appropriate line officers assigned to the 
     Walla Walla office and the Boise office of the Project to 
     publish by April 30, 1996, an eastside final environmental 
     impact statement, without a record of decision, for the 
     Federal lands subject to the Project in Oregon and Washington 
     and an Upper Columbia Basin final environmental impact 
     statement, without a record of decision, for the Federal 
     lands subject to the Project in Idaho and Montana and other 
     affected States, respectively. Among other matters, the final 
     environmental impact statements shall contain the scientific 
     information collected and analysis undertaken by the Project 
     on landscape dynamics and forest health conditions and the 
     implications of such dynamics and conditions for forest 
     management, including the management of forest vegetation 
     structure, composition, and density.
       (c)(1) From the funds appropriated to the Forest Service 
     and the Bureau of Land Management, the Secretary of 
     Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior as the case may 
     be, shall--
       (A) review the resource management plan (hereinafter 
     ``plan'') for each national forest and unit of lands 
     administered by the Bureau of Land Management (hereinafter 
     ``forest'') within the area encompassed by the Project, the 
     analysis in the relevant draft environmental impact statement 
     prepared pursuant to subsection (b) which is applicable to 
     such plan, and any policy which is applicable to such plan 
     (whether or not such policy is final or draft, or has been 
     added to such plan by amendment), which is or is intended to 
     be of limited duration, and which the Project addresses; and
       (B) based on such review, determine whether such policy 
     modified to meet the specific conditions of such forest, or 
     an alternative policy which serves the purpose of such 
     policy, should be adopted for such forest.
       (2) If the Secretary concerned makes a decision that such a 
     modified or alternative policy should be adopted for such 
     forest, the Secretary concerned shall prepare and adopt for 
     the resource management plan for such forest an amendment 
     which contains such policy, which is directed solely to and 
     affects only such plan, and which addresses the specific 
     conditions of the forest and the relationship of such policy 
     to 

[[Page S 11859]]
     such conditions. The Secretary shall consult with the Governor of the 
     State, and the Commissioner of the county or counties, in 
     which the forest is situated prior to such decision and, if 
     the decision is to prepare an amendment, during the 
     preparation thereof.
       (3) To the maximum extent practicable, any amendment 
     prepared pursuant to paragraph (2) shall establish procedures 
     to develop site-specific standards in lieu of imposing 
     general standards applicable to multiple sites. Any amendment 
     which would result in any change in land allocations within 
     the land management plan or reduce the likelihood of 
     achievement of the goals and objectives of the plan (prior to 
     any previous amendment incorporating in the plan any policy 
     referred to in paragraph (1)(A)) shall be deemed a 
     significant plan amendment, or equivalent, pursuant to 
     section 6(f)(4) of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable 
     Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604(f)(4)) or 
     section 202 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 
     1976 (43 U.S.C. 1712).
       (4)(A) Any amendment prepared pursuant to paragraph (2) 
     which adopts a policy that is a modification of or 
     alternative to a policy referred to in paragraph (1)(A) upon 
     which consultation or conferencing has occurred pursuant to 
     section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 
     1536) shall not again be subject to the consultation or 
     conferencing provisions of such section 7.
       (B) If required by such section 7, the Secretary concerned 
     shall consult or conference separately on each amendment 
     prepared pursuant to paragraph (2) which is not subject to 
     subparagraph (A).
       (C) No further consultation other than the consultation 
     specified in subparagraph (B) shall be undertaken on any 
     amendments prepared pursuant to paragraph (2), on any project 
     or activity which is consistent with an applicable amendment, 
     on any policy referred to in paragraph (1)(A), or on any 
     portion of any resource management plan related to such 
     policy or the species to which such policy applies.
       (5) Any amendment prepared pursuant to paragraph (2) shall 
     be adopted on or before July 31, 1996: Provided, That any 
     amendment deemed a significant amendment pursuant to 
     paragraph (3) shall be adopted on or before December 31, 
     1996.
       (6) No policy referred to in paragraph (1)(A), or any 
     provision of a resource management plan or other planning 
     document incorporating such policy, shall be effective on or 
     after December 31, 1996, or after an amendment is promulgated 
     subject to the provisions of this section, whichever occurs 
     first.
       (d) The documents prepared under the authority of this 
     section shall not be applied or used to regulate non-Federal 
     lands in the affected States.
       [Sec. 315. (a) The Secretary of the Interior (acting 
     through the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park 
     Service and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service) and 
     the Secretary of Agriculture (acting through the Forest 
     Service) shall each implement a fee program to demonstrate 
     the feasibility of user-generated cost recovery for the 
     operation and maintenance of recreation sites and habitat 
     enhancement projects on Federal lands.
       [(b) In carrying out the pilot program established pursuant 
     to this section, the appropriate Secretary shall select from 
     areas under the jurisdiction of each of the four agencies 
     referred to in subsection (a) no fewer than 10, but as many 
     as 30, sites or projects for fee demonstration. For each such 
     demonstration, the Secretary, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law--
       [(1) shall charge and collect fees for admission to the 
     area or for the use of outdoor recreation sites, facilities, 
     visitor centers, equipment, and services by individuals and 
     groups, or any combination thereof;
       [(2) shall establish fees under this section based upon a 
     variety of cost recovery and fair market valuation methods to 
     provide a broad basis for feasibility testing;
       [(3) may contract with any public or private entity to 
     provide visitor services, including reservations and 
     information, and may accept services of volunteers to collect 
     fees charged pursuant to paragraph (1); and
       [(4) may encourage private investment and partnerships to 
     enhance the delivery of quality customer services and 
     resource enhancement, and provide appropriate recognition to 
     such partners or investors.
       [(c)(1) Amounts collected at each fee demonstration site in 
     excess of 104 percent of that site's total collections during 
     the previous fiscal year shall be distributed as follows:
       [(i) Eighty percent of the amounts collected at the 
     demonstration site shall be deposited in a special account in 
     the Treasury established for the administrative unit in which 
     the project is located and shall remain available for 
     expenditure in accordance with paragraph (3) for further 
     activities of the site or project.
       [(ii) Twenty percent of the amounts collected at the 
     demonstration site shall be deposited in a special account in 
     the Treasury for each agency and shall remain available for 
     expenditure in accordance with paragraph (3) for use on an 
     agencywide basis.
       [(2) For purposes of this subsection, ``total collections'' 
     for each site shall be defined as gross collections before 
     any reduction for amounts attributable to collection costs.
       [(3) Expenditures from the special funds shall be accounted 
     for separately.
       [(4) In order to increase the quality of the visitor 
     experience at public recreational areas and enhance the 
     protection of resources, amounts available for expenditure 
     under paragraph (1) may only be used for the site or project 
     concerned, for backlogged repair and maintenance projects 
     (including projects relating to health and safety) and for 
     interpretation, signage, habitat or facility enhancement, 
     resource preservation, annual operation, maintenance, and law 
     enforcement relating to public use. The agencywide accounts 
     may be used for the same purposes set forth in the preceding 
     sentence, but for sites or projects selected at the 
     discretion of the respective agency head.
       [(d)(1) Amounts collected under this section shall not be 
     taken into account for the purposes of the Act of May 23, 
     1908 and the Act of March 1, 1911 (16 U.S.C. 500), the Act of 
     March 4, 1913 (16 U.S.C. 501), the Act of July 22, 1937 (7 
     U.S.C. 1012), the Act of August 8, 1937 and the Act of May 
     24, 1939 (43 U.S.C. 1181f et seq.), the Act of June 14, 1926 
     (43 U.S.C. 869-4), chapter 69 of title 31, United States 
     Code, section 401 of the Act of June 15, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 
     715s), the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 
     U.S.C. 460l), and any other provision of law relating to 
     revenue allocation.
       [(2) Fees charged pursuant to this section shall be in lieu 
     of fees charged under any other provision of law.
       [(e) The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall carry out this section without promulgating 
     regulations.
       [(f) The authority to collect fees under this section shall 
     commence on October 1, 1995, and end on September 30, 1996. 
     Funds in accounts established shall remain available through 
     September 30, 1997.]
       Sec. 315. (a) The Secretary of the Interior (acting through 
     the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service and 
     the United States Fish and Wildlife Service) and the 
     Secretary of Agriculture (acting through the Forest Service) 
     shall each implement a fee program to demonstrate the 
     feasibility of user-generated cost recovery for the operation 
     and maintenance of recreation areas or sites and habitat 
     enhancement projects on Federal lands.
       (b) In carrying out the pilot program established pursuant 
     to this section, the appropriate Secretary shall select from 
     areas under the jurisdiction of each of the four agencies 
     referred to in subsection (a) no fewer than 10, but as many 
     as 50, areas, sites or projects for fee demonstration. For 
     each such demonstration, the Secretary, notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law--
       (1) shall charge and collect fees for admission to the area 
     or for the use of outdoor recreation sites, facilities, 
     visitor centers, equipment, and services by individuals and 
     groups, or any combination thereof;
       (2) shall establish fees under this section based upon a 
     variety of cost recovery and fair market valuation methods to 
     provide a broad basis for feasibility testing;
       (3) may contract, including provisions for reasonable 
     commissions, with any public or private entity to provide 
     visitor services, including reservations and information, and 
     may accept services of volunteers to collect fees charged 
     pursuant to paragraph (1);
       (4) may encourage private investment and partnerships to 
     enhance the delivery of quality customer services and 
     resource enhancement, and provide appropriate recognition to 
     such partners or investors; and
       (5) may assess a fine of not more than $100 for any 
     violation of the authority to collect fees for admission to 
     the area or for the use of outdoor recreation sites, 
     facilities, visitor centers, equipment, and services.
       (c)(1) Amounts collected at each fee demonstration site 
     shall be distributed as follows:
       (A) Of the amount in excess of 104 percent of the amount 
     collected in fiscal year 1995, and thereafter annually 
     adjusted upward by 4 percent, 80 percent to a special account 
     in the Treasury for use by the agency which administers the 
     site, to remain available for expenditures in accordance with 
     paragraph (3)(A).
       (B) Of the amount in excess of 104 percent of the amount 
     collected in fiscal year 1995, and thereafter annually 
     adjusted upward by 4 percent, 20 percent to a special account 
     in the Treasury for use by the agency which administers the 
     site, to remain available for expenditure in accordance with 
     paragraph (3)(B).
       (C) For agencies other than the Fish and Wildlife Service, 
     up to 15 percent of current year collections at each site, 
     but not greater than fee collection costs for that fiscal 
     year, to remain available for expenditure in accordance with 
     paragraph (3)(C).
       (D) For agencies other than the Fish and Wildlife Service, 
     the balance to the special account established pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A) of section 4(i)(1) of the Land and Water 
     Conservation Act as amended.
       (E) For the Fish and Wildlife Service, the balance shall be 
     distributed in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Service 
     Administrative Provisions of this Act.
       (2) For purposes of the subsection, ``total collections'' 
     for each site shall be defined as gross collections before 
     any reduction for amounts attributable to collection costs.
       (3)(A) Expenditures from site specific special funds shall 
     be for further activities of each site, and shall be 
     accounted for separately. Expenditures for each site shall be 
     in proportion to total collections from the demonstration 
     sites administered by an agency.
       (B) Expenditures from agency specific special funds shall 
     be for use on an agency-wide basis and shall be accounted for 
     separately.
       (C) Expenditures from the fee collection support fund shall 
     be used to cover fee collection costs in accordance with 
     section 4(i)(1)(B) of the Land and Water Conservation Act as 
     amended.
       (4) In order to increase the quality of the visitor 
     experience at public recreational areas and enhance the 
     protection of resources, amounts available for expenditure 
     under paragraph (1) 

[[Page S 11860]]
     may only be used for the site or project concerned, for backlogged 
     repair and maintenance projects (including projects relating 
     to health and safety) and for interpretation, signage, 
     habitat or facility enhancement, resource preservation, 
     annual operation (including fee collection), maintenance, and 
     law enforcement relating to public use. The agencywide 
     accounts may be used for the same purposes set forth in the 
     preceding sentence, but for sites or projects selected at the 
     discretion of the respective agency head.
       (d)(1) Amounts collected under this section shall not be 
     taken into account for the purposes of the Act of May 23, 
     1908 and the Act of March 1, 1911 (16 U.S.C. 500), the Act of 
     March 4, 1913 (16 U.S.C. 501), the Act of July 22, 1937 (7 
     U.S.C. 1012), the Act of August 8, 1937 and the Act of May 
     24, 1939 (43 U.S.C. 1181f et seq.), the Act of June 14, 1926 
     (43 U.S.C. 869-4), chapter 69 of title 31, United States 
     Code, section 401 of the Act of June 15, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 
     715s), the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 
     U.S.C. 460l), and any other provision of law relating to 
     revenue allocation.
       (2) Fees charged pursuant to this section shall be in lieu 
     of fees charged under any other provision of law.
       (e) The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall carry out this section without promulgating 
     regulations.
       (f) The authority to collect fees under this section shall 
     commence on October 1, 1995, and end on September 30, 1998. 
     Funds in accounts established shall remain available through 
     September 30, 2001.
       [Sec. 316. The Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management 
     may offer for sale salvageable timber in the Pacific 
     Northwest in fiscal year 1996: Provided, That for public 
     lands known to contain the Northern spotted owl, such salvage 
     sales may be offered as long as the offering of such sale 
     will not render the area unsuitable as habitat for the 
     Northern spotted owl: Provided further, That timber salvage 
     activity in spotted owl habitat is to be done in full 
     compliance with all existing environmental and forest 
     management laws.]
       Sec. 317. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used for any program, project, or activity when it is made 
     known to the Federal entity or official to which the funds 
     are made available that the program, project, or activity is 
     not in compliance with any applicable Federal law relating to 
     risk assessment, the protection of private property rights, 
     or unfunded mandates.
       [Sec. 318. None of the funds provided in this Act may be 
     made available for the Mississippi River Corridor Heritage 
     Commission.
       [Sec. 319. (a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--None of the 
     funds made available in this Act may be used by the 
     Department of Energy in implementing the Codes and Standards 
     Program to plan, propose, issue, or prescribe any new or 
     amended standard.
       [(b) Corresponding Reduction in Funds.--The aggregate 
     amount otherwise provided in this Act for ``DEPARTMENT OF 
     ENERGY--Energy Conservation'' is hereby reduced by 
     $12,799,000.
       [Sec. 320. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used by the Department of Energy in implementing the Codes 
     and Standards Program to plan, propose, issue, or prescribe 
     any new or amended standard--
       [(1) when it is made known to the Federal official having 
     authority to obligate or expend such funds that the Attorney 
     General, in accordance with section 325(o)(2)(B) of the 
     Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)), 
     determined that the standard is likely to cause significant 
     anti-competitive effects;
       [(2) that the Secretary of Energy, in accordance with such 
     section 325(o)(2)(B), has determined that the benefits of the 
     standard do not exceed its burdens; or
       [(3) that is for fluorescent lamps ballasts.]
       Sec. 320. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used by the Department of Energy in implementing the Codes 
     and Standards Program to plan, propose, issue, or prescribe 
     any new or amended standard for fluorescent lamps ballasts.
       Sec. 321. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used (1) to demolish the bridge between Jersey City, New 
     Jersey, and Ellis Island; or (2) to prevent pedestrian use of 
     such bridge, when it is made known to the Federal official 
     having authority to obligate or expend such funds that such 
     pedestrian use is consistent with generally accepted safety 
     standards.
       [Sec. 322. No funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available pursuant to this Act in fiscal year 1996 shall be 
     obligated or expended to accept or process applications for a 
     patent for any mining or mill site claim located under the 
     general mining laws or to issue a patent for any such claim.]
       Sec. 323. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act may be used for the purposes of 
     acquiring lands in the counties of Lawrence, Monroe, or 
     Washington, Ohio, for the Wayne National Forest.
       Sec. 324. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act or any other Act shall be expended or obligated to fund 
     the activities of the Office of Forestry and Economic 
     Development after December 31, 1995.
       Sec. 325. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act or any other Act shall be expended or obligated to: (a) 
     redefine the definition of an area in which a marbled 
     murrelet is ``known to be nesting''; or (b) to modify the 
     protocol for surveying for marbled murrelets in effect on 
     July 21, 1995.
       Sec. 326. (a) Land Exchange.--The Secretary of the Interior 
     (hereinafter referred to as the ``Secretary'') is authorized 
     to convey to the Boise Cascade Corporation (hereinafter 
     referred to as the ``Corporation''), a corporation formed 
     under the statutes of the State of Delaware, with its 
     principal place of business at Boise, Idaho, title to 
     approximately seven acres of land, more or less, located in 
     sections 14 and 23, township 36 north, range 37 east, 
     Willamette Meridian, Stevens County, Washington, further 
     identified in the records of the Bureau of Reclamation, 
     Department of the Interior, as Tract No. GC-19860, and to 
     accept from the Corporation in exchange therefor, title to 
     approximately one hundred and thirty-six acres of land 
     located in section 19, township 37 north, range 38 east and 
     section 33, township 38 north, range 37 east, Willamette 
     Meridian, Stevens County, Washington, and further identified 
     in the records of the Bureau of Reclamation, Department of 
     the Interior, as Tract No. GC-19858 and Tract No. GC-19859, 
     respectively.
       (b) Appraisal.--The properties so exchanged either shall be 
     approximately equal in fair market value or if they are not 
     approximately equal, shall be equalized by the payment of 
     cash to the Corporation or to the Secretary as required or in 
     the event the value of the Corporation's lands is greater, 
     the acreage may be reduced so that the fair market value is 
     approximately equal: Provided, That the Secretary shall order 
     appraisals made of the fair market value of each tract of 
     land included in the exchange without consideration for 
     improvements thereon: Provided further, That any cash payment 
     received by the Secretary shall be covered in the Reclamation 
     Fund and credited to the Columbia Basin project.
       (c) Administrative Costs.--Costs of conducting the 
     necessary land surveys, preparing the legal descriptions of 
     the lands to be conveyed, performing the appraisals, and 
     administrative costs incurred in completing the exchange 
     shall be borne by the Corporation.
       (d) Liability for Hazardous Substances.--(1) The Secretary 
     shall not acquire any lands under this Act if the Secretary 
     determines that such lands, or any portion thereof, have 
     become contaminated with hazardous substances (as defined in 
     the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601)).
       (2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the United 
     States shall have no responsibility or liability with respect 
     to any hazardous wastes or other substances placed on any of 
     the lands covered by this Act after their transfer to the 
     ownership of any party, but nothing in this Act shall be 
     construed as either diminishing or increasing any 
     responsibility or liability of the United States based on the 
     condition of such lands on the date of their transfer to the 
     ownership of another party. The Corporation shall indemnify 
     the United States for liabilities arising under the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601), and the Resource Conservation 
     Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.).
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out 
     the purposes of this Act.
       Sec. 327. Timber Sales Pipeline Restoration Funds.--(a) The 
     Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior 
     shall each establish a Timber Sales Pipeline Restoration Fund 
     (hereinafter ``Agriculture Fund'' and ``Interior Fund'' or 
     ``Funds''). Any revenues received from sales released under 
     section 2001(k) of the Fiscal Year 1995 Supplemental 
     Appropriations for Disaster Assistance and Rescissions Act, 
     minus the funds necessary to make payments to States or local 
     governments under other law concerning the distribution of 
     revenues derived from the affected lands, which are in excess 
     of $37,500,000 (hereinafter ``excess revenues'') shall be 
     deposited into the Funds. The distribution of excess revenues 
     between the Agriculture Fund and Interior Fund shall be 
     calculated by multiplying the total of excess revenues times 
     a fraction with a denominator of the total revenues received 
     from all sales released under such section 2001(k) and 
     numerators of the total revenues received from such sales on 
     lands within the National Forest System and the total 
     revenues received from such sales on lands administered by 
     the Bureau of Land Management, respectively: Provided, That 
     revenues or portions thereof from sales released under such 
     section 2001(k), minus the amounts necessary for State and 
     local government payments and other necessary deposits, may 
     be deposited into the Funds immediately upon receipt thereof 
     and subsequently redistributed between the Funds or paid into 
     the United States Treasury as miscellaneous receipts as may 
     be required when the calculation of excess revenues is made.
       (b)(1) From the funds deposited into the Agriculture Fund 
     and into the Interior Fund pursuant to subsection (a)--
       (A) seventy-five percent shall be available, without fiscal 
     year limitation or further appropriation, for preparation of 
     timber sales, other than salvage sales as defined in section 
     2001(a)(3) of the fiscal year 1995 Supplemental 
     Appropriations for Disaster Assistance and Rescissions Act, 
     which--
       (i) are situated on lands within the National Forest System 
     and lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management, 
     respectively; and
       (ii) are in addition to timber sales for which funds are 
     otherwise available in this Act or other appropriations acts.
       (B) twenty-five percent shall be available, without fiscal 
     year limitation or further appropriation, to expend on the 
     backlog of recreation projects on lands within the National 
     Forest System and lands administered by the Bureau of Land 
     Management, respectively.
       (2) Expenditures under this subsection for preparation of 
     timber sales may include expenditures for Forest Service 
     activities within the forest land management budget line item 
     and associated timber roads, and Bureau of Land Management 
     activities within the Oregon and 

[[Page S 11861]]
     California grant lands account and the forestry management area 
     account, as determined by the Secretary concerned.
       (c) Revenues received from any timber sale prepared under 
     subsection (b) or under this subsection, minus the amounts 
     necessary for State and local government payments and other 
     necessary deposits, shall be deposited into the Fund from 
     which funds were expended on such sale. Such deposited 
     revenues shall be available for preparation of additional 
     timber sales and completion of additional recreation projects 
     in accordance with the requirements set forth in subsection 
     (b).
       (d) The Secretary concerned shall terminate all payments 
     into the Agriculture Fund or the Interior Fund, and pay any 
     unobligated funds in the affected Fund into the United States 
     Treasury as miscellaneous receipts, whenever the Secretary 
     concerned makes a finding, published in the Federal Register, 
     that sales sufficient to achieve the total allowable sales 
     quantity of the national forest system for the Forest Service 
     or the allowable sales level for the Oregon and California 
     grant lands for the Bureau of Land Management, respectively, 
     have been prepared.
       (e) Any timber sales prepared and recreation projects 
     completed under this section shall comply with all applicable 
     environmental and natural resource laws and regulations.
       (f) The Secretary concerned shall report annually to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the U.S. Senate and the House 
     of Representatives on expenditures made from the Fund for 
     timber sales and recreation projects, revenues received into 
     the Fund from timber sales, and timber sale preparation and 
     recreation project work undertaken during the previous year 
     and projected for the next year under the Fund. Such 
     information shall be provided for each Forest Service region 
     and Bureau of Land Management State office.
       (g) The authority of this section shall terminate upon the 
     termination of both Funds in accordance with the provisions 
     of subsection (d).
       Sec. 328. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none 
     of the funds provided in this or any other act shall be 
     available for travel and training expenses for the Bureau of 
     Indian Affairs or the Office of Indian Education for 
     education conferences or training activities.
       Sec. 329. Of the funds provided to the National Endowment 
     for the Arts:
       (a) The Chairperson shall only award a grant to an 
     individual if such grant is awarded to such individual for a 
     literature fellowship.
       (b) The Chairperson shall establish procedures to ensure 
     that no funding provided through a grant, except a grant made 
     to a State or regional group, may be used to make a grant to 
     any other organization or individual to conduct activity 
     independent of the direct grant recipient. Nothing in this 
     subsection shall prohibit payments made in exchange for goods 
     and services.
       (c) No grant shall be used for seasonal support to a group, 
     unless the application is specific to the contents of the 
     season, including identified programs and/or projects.
       This Act may be cited as the ``Department of the Interior 
     and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996''.

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I lay before the Senate this afternoon the 
fiscal year 1996 Department of the Interior and related agencies 
appropriations bill.
  This bill, as reported by the Appropriations Committee, totals 
$12,122,927,000 in discretionary budget authority, $73,000 below the 
subcommittee's 602(b) allocation. The outlay scoring totals 
$13,167,502,000, $6,498,000 below allocation. The bill is 
$1,777,000,000 less than the President's budget request for budget 
authority and $991 million below the President's budget request for 
outlays.
  Mr. President, the bill before the Senate represents intensely 
difficult choices and real cuts in spending of $1.5 billion below the 
fiscal year 1995 level or a reduction of 11 percent.
  Mr. President, I want to repeat that last statement. There is $1.5 
billion less in this bill than there was in the bill passed by the 
Congress, signed by the President, covering the current 1995 fiscal 
year. That is 11 percent less money from that 1995 base.
  As a consequence, in crafting this bill, we have had to engage in the 
process of distributing poverty or distributing reductions. For all 
practical purposes, there are no programs of any significant size that 
are increased in this bill and very, very few which we have been able 
to keep even.
  Members will be frustrated--and I think perhaps rightly frustrated--
by the fact that some of their important priorities have suffered 
reductions and can only effectively deal with those reductions when 
they compare them with the overall reductions in the bill as a whole.
  Now, agencies covered by this bill primarily in the Department of the 
Interior do not share equally in the 11-percent reduction. For 
instance, the land management agencies are reduced by 4 percent, 
cultural activities by 15 percent, Indian programs by 8 percent, and 
Department of Energy programs by 10 percent.
  Other Members have raised concerns about the sensitivity to the 
budget resolution recommendations. This proposal reflects the meshing 
of the budget resolution, the bill priorities of the subcommittee which 
wrote this bill, and of members of the full Appropriations Committee 
together with concerns of individual Members and the administration's 
own priorities.
  In fact, as another aside, Mr. President, I can say that the 
allocations out of which this bill were built are slightly higher than 
those that were considered and passed by this body in the budget 
resolution.
  If we had followed the budget resolution to the exclusion of all 
other considerations, the total amount spent would have been even 
lower. For instance, members of the administration in the broadest 
possible sense have placed a high priority on the preservation and 
enhancement of the National Park Service. As a consequence, the Park 
Service was reduced by only 6 percent overall, with no reduction for 
Park Service operations.
  In the budget resolution, a moratorium on land acquisition was 
assumed. Member interest, however, necessitated funding to some land 
acquisitions even though they are at drastically reduced levels.
  Also, an item, which seems to have been lost when considering the 
budget committee recommendations, is the $379 million reduction for 
unidentified Interior bill overhead. I remind Members that overhead 
costs exist in all agencies. We faced the question of how that should 
be dealt with. If applied to some of the smaller agencies, such a 
reduction would have had a devastating and unacceptable effect.
  As has been the practice in past years, the bill before us today was 
formulated in a bipartisan manner. I wish to thank Senator Byrd and his 
staff for their assistance and cooperation in drafting the Interior 
bill
  Again, Mr. President, off of my prepared text here, I should like to 
express my deep admiration for Senator Byrd, the ranking member of this 
subcommittee. I am brand new to this responsibility. He has held more 
offices in this Senate, including majority leader and President pro 
tempore, than has any other individual in its history. He was, last 
year, in addition to being chairman of the overall Appropriations 
Committee, chairman of the Subcommittee on Interior and Related 
Agencies. It, obviously, has to be very difficult to give up that 
position and that authority to someone who is new to these 
responsibilities entirely, but Senator Byrd has been not only gracious 
and cooperative, but has provided me with a wonderful education in the 
priorities and responsibilities that fall to me as chairman of the 
subcommittee and as manager of this bill. I want to thank him for that 
graciousness, and for that education.
  Now, Mr. President, I should like to report that the subcommittee 
received more than 1,400 requests for amendments to the bill, or for 
projects within the bill. Even that represents a major step forward 
from what Senator Byrd faced last year, which, if my memory serves me 
correctly, was more than 3,000 such requests. Perhaps that reduction 
does reflect the fact that most Members understand that we have this 
major cut. But they have made it difficult to honor more than a 
relatively few of them.
  Many of those 1,400 requests, which total up to $2.1 billion, 
presumed the enactment of amounts contained in the President's budget 
and then proposed to add something beyond that number. With the budget 
constraints that we faced, our starting point had to be the fiscal year 
1995 budget, with extensive review and attention to the President's 
budget proposals, but with the necessity to reduce significantly below 
that 1995 level.
  There are, obviously, many programs which individual Senators would 
like to see funded at higher levels. In many cases I agree. I do have 
to emphasize, and remind these Senators, however, of the funding 
constraints that the subcommittee faced and the difficult choices that 
had to be made.
  Any amendments to increase any program area must be offset by 
reductions elsewhere to remain within our allocations in the 
Appropriations Committee and, of course, within the budget resolution 
overall. Now, let me turn 

[[Page S 11862]]
briefly to the recommendations that are before you today. These are 
only highlights.
  Programs for Native Americans and Alaska Natives are funded at 
$3,532,042,000 within the bill, almost 30 percent of its entire amount. 
Within the funding constraints faced by the committee, efforts were 
made to protect basic health care services provided through the Indian 
Health Service, and the education, trust, and natural resources 
programs within the Interior Department.
  Funding has been provided for the Office of Special Trustee for 
American Indians, by transferring funding for natural resources 
management, trust services, resource management construction, and 
miscellaneous payments for Indian land and water settlements from BIA 
to the office. The activities that remain within the BIA are primarily 
services that are typically provided through local governments.
  Concerns have been raised by the chairman and ranking member of the 
Indian Affairs Committee concerning potential impacts of the 
committee's proposal on the confirmation of the special trustee. As a 
result, I plan to offer an amendment that will transfer the most of the 
activities proposed for the Office of Special Trustee for American 
Indians back to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Only the financial trust 
management functions and the immediate office of the special trustee 
will remain. I hope that the merits of the committee's proposal will be 
considered as the Indian Affairs Committee considers legislation 
reorganizing the BIA. In any event, this is properly its 
responsibility.


                            land management

  On the next subject, the subcommittee has attempted to protect the 
operational base of the land management agencies as much as possible. I 
have already spoken to the fact there are no such reductions for the 
National Park Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service has a 3-percent 
reduction, the Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service each 5-
percent reduction.
  To assist with the growing recreation demands on the agencies in this 
bill, a pilot recreation fee proposal is included in the bill after 
consultation with the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  The construction accounts for the land management agencies have 
decreased $88 million in total--20 percent. The majority of the 
construction projects involve the completion of ongoing projects and 
the restoration or rehabilitation of existing facilities. No new starts 
for visitor centers are provided.
  Overall funding for land acquisition for the land management agencies 
totals $127 million which is about halfway between last year's level 
and the outright moratorium included in the budget resolution. The 
committee has identified specific projects, while the House bill did 
not. Priority is given to completing ongoing acquisitions and avoiding 
new starts that will increase outyear demands.


            natural resources science agency (formerly NBS)

  The committee has recommended retaining the Department of the 
Interior's biological research as a separate entity. Direction is 
provided to refocus the agency's work on issues most critical to the 
land managers, but language is included to protect private property 
owners.


                            mining agencies

  The committee has not included a moratorium on accepting and 
processing applications for mining patents, and that will be subject 
to, perhaps, an amendment that will be proposed very, very soon.
  The mining and minerals related agencies are collectively funded at 8 
percent below the fiscal year 1995 level. The committee mark funds the 
Bureau of Mines at the request level of $132.5 million, a decrease of 
$20 million from fiscal year 1995. Field facilities proposed for 
closure in the budget will be maintained at lower staffing levels.
  The mark also includes OCS moratoria language covering the same areas 
covered by last year's bill.


                          department of energy

  The Energy Conservation Program is funded at $577 million. The low-
income Weatherization Program is funded at $137 million, or about $26.5 
million above the House-passed level. The State energy block grants are 
funded at $31.5 million, $5 million above the House level. Bill 
language has been included to prohibit DOE from proposing or issuing 
any new or amended standards for fluorescent lamps ballasts.
  Fossil energy research and development is a decrease of 11 percent 
below the fiscal year 1995 level. Similar reductions are expected over 
the next several fiscal years.


                           cultural agencies

  Within the constraints of our bill, we have made a concerted effort 
to address the critical repair and renovation needs of the cultural 
organizations, such as the National Gallery of Art, the Smithsonian 
Institution, and the Kennedy Center, for which we have the primary 
responsibility in order to protect collections and structures of 
importance to the American people. Reductions to operating accounts, 
while unavoidable, have been kept relatively small in recognition of 
the wide array of public services which in part define the mission of 
these agencies.
  As a result, more significant reductions have been necessarily taken 
to the budgets of the Endowments, whose mandates are fulfilled in 
varying degrees based on the availability of funds, but whose 
beneficiaries, of course, have many other sources of support. We make 
no assumptions with respect to the continuation or termination of the 
Endowments, believing that to be the function of the authorizing 
committee.
  In short, we have done the best we can with severely limited 
resources, concentrating our efforts on those agencies that rely on the 
Congress for all, or about all, of their support.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I am pleased to support the introductory 
remarks of the chairman.
  May I say at the outset that this chairman is one of the finest 
subcommittee chairman that I have seen in my years here. He has shown a 
very studious approach and has in my judgment mastered this very 
complex bill. It is a bill that funds 40 agencies, and I salute him 
without envy by stating that he has come to grips with this bill and I 
think has understood its complexities more in this 1 year than I have 
been able to understand in the several years I have been chairman and 
ranking member, back and forth from time to time. I have found him to 
be very fair and reasonable. He is sharp and he is dedicated. I think 
he is a man who is molded for this particular subcommittee.
  It is a subcommittee that I would have to say is probably far more 
western in its orientation than others. He comes from the West and he 
is familiar with those issues that are of such interest to the West. It 
has been a pleasure to work with him, and I have learned from him.
  I will not engage in a lengthy summary of the bill because I believe 
the major issues confronting the subcommittee have already been laid 
out.
  This is not an easy bill to put together. The interests are 
competing, and the policy issues are of great importance to many 
Senators. As I have said, Senator Gorton has grasped the ramifications 
of these issues quickly, and has been very thoughtful in his approach 
to this bill. He has tried to make the best out of a very difficult 
situation. The cuts in this bill are very real, but the chairman was 
left with little choice because of the dictates of the budget 
resolution. Members should remember that in total, this appropriations 
bill is $1.1 billion, or 11 percent, below the fiscal year 1995 level.
  In general, this bill protects the operating accounts of the 
agencies, and constrains construction and land acquisition funding 
below prior year levels. Despite these efforts to protect the core 
programs that deliver services to the American public, the Interior 
Department has estimated that it may have to reduce its current work 
force by 4,000 positions. Some of these reductions will occur in 
Washington, DC, but the vast majority of them will occur where the 
programs are conducted--in places like Pittsburgh, Denver, Sacramento, 
Portland, Billings, Tuscon, Gainesville, Charleston, and the like. This 
bill is evidence that when the Appropriations Committee has to 
distribute spending cuts of the magnitude imposed by the budget 
resolution, programs will be reduced, and so will the number of people 
who deliver them. As one agency director reminded me, we 

[[Page S 11863]]
are beyond the point of doing more with less--we are now having to do 
less with less.
  Despite these constraints, Mr. President, the programs of this bill 
are endorsed warmly when it comes to specific requests for individual 
projects, especially for more land acquisition and construction. Even 
after the budget resolution recommended a moratorium on land 
acquisition and cuts in construction, the subcommittee was besieged by 
requests from both sides of the aisle for these types of projects. The 
chairman and subcommittee have sought to accommodate the most critical 
projects, while still reducing the overall program.
  The committee has not concurred with some of the program terminations 
proposed by the House. The subcommittee has recommended a reduced, yet 
responsible, level for natural resources research within the Interior 
Department. Funding is also provided to ensure that critical health and 
safety, mineral information, and pollution abatement activities of the 
Bureau of Mines are addressed, although at a level $20 million below 
last year.
  Mr. President, there will be an amendment offered to this bill to 
reduce funding in various operating accounts in order to put more money 
into the programs of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Senator Gorton and I 
will join together in opposition to this effort to undo the carefully 
crafted compromise we bring to the Senate today.
  Mr. President, this bill is right at its 602(b) allocation, so 
amendments will need to be offset. Nearly all of the accounts in the 
bill are funded well below last year's level, the exceptions being the 
National Park Service operating account and the Indian Health services 
account, which are essentially frozen at the current level, with no 
allowances for the effects of fixed cost increases, pay, inflation, and 
the costs of new facilities.
  I encourage Senators who may have amendments to this bill to come to 
the floor, and let us begin to address the amendments. This bill faces 
a difficult conference, and the sooner we finish our work in the 
Senate, the better the chances are of completing action on this bill 
prior to the beginning of the new fiscal year on October 1. Many of the 
potential amendments to which the subcommittee has been alerted have 
been debated previously on this bill, and I hope Senators will be 
cooperative and willing to enter into time agreements so that we can 
complete this bill as expeditiously as possible.
  Lastly, I wish to thank Senator Gorton and his staff for the 
cooperative working relationship we have had in this bill.
  In particular, I thank Sue Masica, my own very competent and 
dedicated staff person, for the excellent work that she consistently 
performs and has performed over the years she has been with the 
committee.
  I also thank Cherie Cooper for her fine work and pleasant way of 
dealing with all of us and her very cooperative and congenial manner.
  The choices are difficult in this bill, but the task has been made 
easier by the fair manner in which this bill has been handled by the 
chairman and by his staff as well as by my own staff.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague from 
West Virginia for those comments and for that support.
  Nevertheless, he and I both realize from our past history that this 
is a bill which attracts a great deal of interest, a certain degree of 
controversy and a significant number of amendments.
  I am personally gratified by the fact that we have Members already 
willing to propose those amendments. I just have a couple of other 
announcements and I hope a motion.
  Normally, we would now adopt committee amendments. I had hoped to 
adopt the committee amendments en bloc and have the bill in condition 
to be further amended. But first there were three objections to 
particular committee amendments which Members wished to amend 
themselves. And then the senior Senator from Texas [Mr. Gramm], desired 
to read all of the committee amendments to determine which he wished to 
amend first. So I am not going to move to adopt any committee 
amendments now.
  We have worked as diligently as we can with Members who have 
relatively noncontroversial amendments and two that are very large but 
nonetheless are agreed to.


                   Amendments Nos. 2283 through 2291

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I would propose at this point to send a 
set of en bloc amendments to the desk and ask that they be considered. 
I will explain them. If any Member wishes to object to any one of them, 
that Member is free to do so. But I trust there will be no such 
objections.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered.
  The clerk will report the amendments en bloc.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Washington [Mr. Gorton] proposes en bloc 
     amendments numbered 2283 through 2291.

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendments be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendments are as follows:

                           AMENDMENT NO. 2283

 (Purpose: To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study 
  concerning the equity regarding entrance, tourism, and recreational 
    fees for the use of Federal lands and facilities, and for other 
                               purposes)

       Insert at page 126, between line 7 and line 8:
       ``(g)(1) It is the policy of the Congress that entrance, 
     tourism, and recreational use fees for the use of Federal 
     lands and facilities not discriminate against any State or 
     any region of the country.
       ``(2) Not later than October 1, 1996, the Secretary of the 
     Interior, in cooperation with the heads of other affected 
     agencies shall prepare and submit to the Senate and House 
     Appropriations Committees a report that--
       ``(A) identifies all Federal lands and facilities that 
     provide tourism or recreational use; and
       ``(B) analyzes by State and region any fees charged for 
     entrance to or for tourism or recreational use of Federal 
     lands and facilities in a State or region, individually and 
     collectively.
       ``(3) Not later than October 1, 1997, the Secretary of the 
     Interior, in cooperation with the heads of other affected 
     agencies, shall prepare and submit to the Senate and House 
     Appropriations Committees any recommendations that the 
     Secretary may have for implementing the policy stated in 
     subsection (1).''
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 2284

 (Purpose: To make explicit that certain prohibitions contained in the 
bill regarding activities under Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act 
         are not to extend beyond the end of fiscal year 1996)

       On page 10, line 16 of the bill, strike ``enacted,'' and 
     insert ``enacted or until the end of fiscal year 1996, 
     whichever is earlier,''.
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 2285

(Purpose: Technical correction to change draft environmental statement 
    to final environmental statement in order to make the Sec. 314 
                         consistent throughout)

       On page 115, line 10, strike ``draft'' and insert in lieu 
     thereof ``final''.
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 2286

(Purpose: Technical amendment to vitiate previous technical correction)

       On page 80, lines 5 through 16, vitiate the Committee 
     amendment and restore the House text.
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 2287

  (Purpose: Technical correction to include proper statutory citation 
                              within bill)

       On page 10, line 15 of the bill, strike ``Endangered 
     Species Act'' and insert ``Endangered Species Act of 1973, 
     (16 U.S.C. 1533)''.
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 2288

   (Purpose: To make technical corrections to Section 115 concerning 
                     Washington State Indian Tribes

       On page 55, line 14, insert ``not'' after ``shall''.
       On page 55, line 15, delete ``action'' and insert 
     ``actions''.
       On page 55, line 16, delete ``judgment'' and insert 
     ``judgments''.
       On page 55, line 16, delete ``has'' and insert ``have'''.
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 2289

 (Purpose: To prohibit the Forest Service from applying paint to rocks)

       On page 76, after line 23, insert the following: None of 
     the funds appropriated under this Act for the Forest Service 
     shall be made available for the purpose of applying paint to 
     rocks, or rock colorization: Provided, That notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law, the Forest Service shall not 
     require of any individual or entity, as part of any 
     permitting process under its authority, or as a requirement 
     of compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 
     1969 (42 U.S.C. 4231 et seq), the painting or colorization of 
     rocks.
                                                                    ____


[[Page S 11864]]



                           amendment no. 2290

 (Purpose: To transfer all funding from the Office of Special Trustee 
 except for financial trust management funding to the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs, including funding for resources management, trust activities, 
  resources management construction, and Indian Land and Water Claim 
           Settlements and Miscellaneous Payments to Indians)

       On page 31, lines 3 through 7, delete the Committee 
     amendment.
       On page 31, line 15, delete ``$997,221,000'' and insert 
     ``$1,260,921,000''.
       On page 32, line 13, delete ``$35,331,000'' and insert 
     ``$62,328,000''.
       On page 32, lines 15 through 17, delete the Committee 
     amendments.
       On page 34, lines 4 through 11, delete the Committee 
     amendment.
       On page 36, line 7, delete the Committee amendment.
       On page 36, lines 9 through 10, restore ``; acquisition of 
     lands and interests in lands; and preparation of lands for 
     farming''.
       On page 36, line 11, delete ``$60,088,000'' and insert 
     ``$107,333,000''.
       On page 36, lines 12 through 16, delete the Committee 
     amendment.
       On page 36, lines 20 through 23, delete the Committee 
     amendment.
       On page 37, lines 22 through page 38, line 23, delete the 
     Committee amendment.
       On page 37, line 26, of the matter restored, strike 
     ``$75,145,000'' and insert ``$82,745,000''.
       On page 38, line 1 of the matter restored, strike 
     ``$73,100,000'' and insert ``$78,600,000''.
       On page 38, line 11 of the matter restored, strike 
     ``$1,000,000'' and insert ``$3,100,000''.
       On page 44, lines 11 through 16, delete the following: `` 
     including expenses necessary to provide for management, 
     development, improvement and protection of resources and 
     appurtenant facilities formerly under the jurisdiction of the 
     Bureau of Indian Affairs, including payment of irrigation 
     assessments and charges and acquisition of water rights''.
       On page 44, line 16, delete ``$280,038,000'' and insert 
     ``$15,338,000'' in lieu thereof.
       On page 44, line 16, delete ``$15,964,000'' and insert 
     ``$15,891,000'' in lieu thereof.
       On page 44, lines 18 through 19, delete ``, attorney fees, 
     litigation support, and the Navajo-Hopi Settlement Program''.
       On page 45, lines 7 through 16, delete beginning with ``: 
     Provided'' on line 7 and ending with ``1997'' on line 16.
       On page 45, lines 18 through 19, delete ``, attorney fees, 
     litigation support, and the Navajo-Hopi Settlement Program''.
       Delete the Committee amendment beginning on page 45 line 23 
     through page 48 line 8.
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 2291

   (Purpose: To delete a provision relating to the Bureau of Indian 
                                Affairs)

       On page 35, beginning on line 11, delete after the word 
     ``area'' (beginning with ``: Provided'') and all that follows 
     through ``Appropriations'' on line 22,

  Mr. GORTON. The first of these amendments, No. 2283, is the amendment 
by the Senator from Colorado, [Mr. Brown] on a Department of the 
Interior study of recreation fees.
  The second, No. 2284, is an amendment from Senator Chafee on the 
Endangered Species Act to clarify that the listing moratorium lasts 
only during the pendency of this bill, that is to say, through 
September 30, 1996. That is what we had intended to do and meant the 
bill to do. It was unclear. And just to make certain, it lasts only for 
that period of time at the longest and will also terminate as and when 
the Endangered Species Act itself is reauthorized.
  The next, amendment No. 2285, is one by myself which substitutes the 
word ``final'' for the word ``draft'' in section 314.
  The fourth, No. 2286, is a technical amendment of mine on the 
petroleum reserve.
  The next, No. 2287, is a technical correction making the proper 
citation to a statute.
  Amendment No. 2288 is a technical correction which inserts the word 
``not'' in a phrase relating to various Indian tribes in the State of 
Washington, which was the original desired meaning of the language.
  Amendment No. 2289 is one on mandatory rock painting required by 
various Federal agencies when highways are built.
  And then there are two that are not technical amendments that are 
agreed to: Amendment No. 2290 for myself, the Senator from Arizona, the 
Senator from Hawaii [Mr. Inouye], and the Senator from New Mexico [Mr. 
Domenici] which will retain trust fund management and special trustee 
funding within the Office of Special Trustees for American Indians but 
transfer all of the other major funding accounts that were included in 
this bill back to the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
  The special trustees office was authorized last year. I think we 
anticipated greater powers for it than the authorizing committee, the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs, is prepared to grant to it at the present 
time. And the subject is properly a matter for that committee to 
consider. So this places only those clear trustee responsibilities in 
the trustee and returns the rest to BIA.
  The amendment transfers back to the Bureau of Indian Affairs all 
funds and FTE's for the Office of Special Trustee for American Indians, 
except for $15,891,000 for Financial Trust Management activities and 
$447,000 for the immediate Office of the Special Trustee.
  A total of $393,690,000 is transferred back to the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs, including $263,700,000 to the Operation of Indian Programs 
account, $47,245,000 to the Construction account, and $82,745,000 to 
the Indian Land and Water Claims Settlements and Miscellaneous Payments 
to Indians account. The Indian Land and Water Claims Settlements and 
Miscellaneous Payments to Indians account is transferred in its 
entirety.
  Within the funds transferred to the Operation of Indian Programs 
account, a total of $73,784,000 is transferred from Trust Asset 
Management and Protection in the Office of Special Trustee to the Other 
Trust Services activities, including $28,692,000 for Tribal Priority 
Allocations, $30,227,000 for Non-recurring Programs, $9,935,000 to Area 
Office Operations, and $4,930,000 to Central Office Operations.
  Within the net amount transferred for Trust Services for Tribal 
Priority Allocations, a reduction of $1,605,000 has been taken that 
includes: $846,000 for pay costs; $527,000 for general trust services 
and $231,000 to real estate services to eliminate increases above the 
FY 1995 level; and $1,000 to other trust services. For Non-recurring 
Programs, a reduction of $237,000 for pay costs has been included and 
$13,472,000 has been transferred for water rights negotiation/
litigation. For Area Office Operations, there is a total reduction of 
$591,000, including a reduction of $291,000 for pay costs, and a 
reduction of $300,00 for land records improvement. For Central Office 
Operations, a total reduction of $58,000 has been taken for pay costs 
and $2,900,000 for land records improvement.
  A total of $142,471,000 is transferred from Resource Management and 
Protection in the Office of Special Trustee to the Resources Management 
activities in the BIA's OIP account, including $65,357,000 to Tribal 
Priority Allocations, $35,556,000 to Other Recurring Programs, 
$31,395,000 to Non-recurring Programs, $3,996,000 to Area Office 
Operations, $1,470,000 to Special Programs and Pooled Overhead, and 
$4,697,000 to Central Office Operations. Any committee direction for 
the programs to be transferred still applies once the programs are 
transferred to the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
  Within the net amount transferred for Resources Management, a 
reduction of $3,020,000 for Tribal Priority Allocations has been taken 
that includes $1,635,000 for pay costs, $620,000 to maintain Wildlife 
and Parks at the fiscal year 1995 level, and $765,000 to maintain Other 
Resources Management at the fiscal year 1995 level. For Non-recurring 
Programs, there is a total reduction of $428,000 for pay costs. For 
Area Office Operations, a total reduction of $505,000 includes $90,000 
for pay costs, $90,000 for Forestry, $50,000 for Water Resources, 
$200,000 for Wildlife and Parks, and $75,000 for Minerals and Mining. 
For Central Office Operations, $80,000 was reduced for pay costs.
  A total of $1,045,000 is transferred from Executive Direction in the 
Office of Special Trustee to Central Office Operations within OIP, 
including $795,000 to the Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs for the 
Office of American Indian Trust, and $250,000 to Other General 
Administration.
  A total of $46,400,000 is transferred from Administrative Support in 
the Office of Special Trustee to Operations of Indian Programs in BIA, 
including $40,000,000 to Tribal Government within Tribal Priority 
Allocations and $6,400,000 to Other General Administration within 
Central Office Operations.
  A total of $47,245,000 is transferred from the Office of Special 
Trustee to the Construction account of the Bureau of Indian Affairs for 
Resource Construction Management. Reductions include $139,000 for pay 
costs, $500,000 for Engineering and Supervision, and $12,024,000 for 
Safety of Dams. For the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, 

[[Page S 11865]]
$25,500,000 is provided and $1,500,000 is provided for the southern 
Arizona project.
  The last one, Amendment No. 2291, is by the same four Senators has to 
do with tribal shares within the central office of the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs.
  The amendment deletes the committee amendment pertaining to 
distribution of tribal share from Central Office Operations and Special 
Programs and Pooled Overhead. The usual reprogramming guidelines of the 
Interior Appropriations Subcommittee should apply to any amount 
negotiated to be transferred as tribal shares to tribes or tribal 
organizations under Public Law 93-638, as amended.


                           amendment no. 2283

  Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, today I offer an amendment to the Interior 
appropriation bill, based on a bill I introduced earlier this year, S. 
340, Public Facilities Fees Equity Act of 1995. This amendment is 
similar to an amendment accepted by the Senate on the California Desert 
Act last year. This amendment involves three parts. One is a simple 
statement of policy, It is to suggest there should not be 
discrimination in the kind of fees we levy across this country; 
discrimination among the States and discrimination between the various 
regions of the country. In other words, we ought to be working toward a 
uniform policy that affects the Nation fairly and evenly.
  Second, it calls for a study of the fees we charge for entrance to 
public facilities, whether they involve tourism or other public 
facilities.
  Third, it calls for recommendations to achieve the policy statement 
that is for even and fair treatment. It relates specifically to this 
amendment because it is not beyond the realm of possibility that fees 
will relate, but its ramifications are broader than that. I think it 
moves us toward a position of equity for the whole Nation.
  Mr. REID addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Reserving the right to object. On the amendment by Senator 
Chafee, I think I heard you say this but I was watching on television, 
not here on the floor. I heard you say that it would be extended during 
this next fiscal year and/or when the Endangered Species Act is 
reauthorized?
  Mr. GORTON. Whichever is earlier.
  The Senator from Arizona is here. I do not know whether he wanted to 
comment on the trust fund or not or is ready to accept these amendments 
en bloc.
  Mr. McCAIN. I am prepared to accept the amendments en bloc and then 
comment on that amendment as part of some general remarks I would like 
to make and some questions I have for the distinguished chairman.
  Mr. GORTON. Fine. Then, Mr. President, I urge the adoption of the 
amendments en bloc.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendments 
en bloc.
  So the amendments (Nos. 2283 through 2291), en bloc were agreed to.
  Mr. McCAIN. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. GORTON. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. GORTON. In attempting expeditiously and efficiently to organize 
the debate, I asked the Senator from Arkansas, Mr. Bumpers, whether or 
not he would put up his annual amendment on mining patents, and he has 
agreed to do so. I understand he is on the way to the floor. When he 
does that, I will move the committee amendment to which that would be 
an amendment.
  In the meantime, I would yield the floor for any remarks the Senator 
from Arizona would like to make.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, first I would like to congratulate both 
the manager of the bill and the distinguished Democratic leader on the 
very difficult decisions that have been made in overall reductions in 
spending over last year.
  I do have several concerns I would like to raise with the manager of 
the bill, and perhaps I can discuss them with him. First of all, when 
the committee amendments are proposed--I have already discussed this 
with the Senator from Washington--I would seek an amendment to 
authorize the funding for the National Endowment for the Arts by both 
Houses.
  Mr. GORTON. Will the Senator yield?
  Does he mean that he would authorize them in this bill or would 
condition the appropriations----
  Mr. McCAIN. Would condition the appropriations with the authorization 
by both Houses.
  And I have already discussed that with the distinguished chairman. I 
would say to the chairman, on page 19, there is a provision that 
states:

       $1,500,000 of the funds provided under this head, to be 
     derived from the Historic Preservation Fund, established by 
     the Historic Preservation Act of 1966 * * * shall be 
     available until expended to render the site safe for visitors 
     and to continue building stabilization of the Kennecott, 
     Alaska copper mine.

  I believe I have reached an agreement with the Senator from Alaska on 
this particular part of the bill. And I think that we will be ready 
soon to propose an amendment that basically says that the changes in 
the language says that ``it may be available until expended to render 
sites safe for visitors.'' I think that is an appropriate correction to 
that part of it.
  Mr. GORTON. I note the presence of the Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. McCAIN. I note his presence also. And I think he might be ready 
in just a few minutes. Let me just go on because I have some questions 
for the distinguished chairman.
  On page 27 of the bill, line 23, it says:

       Provided further, That notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, the Secretary is authorized to convey, without 
     reimbursement, title and all interest of the United States in 
     property and facilities of the United States Bureau of Mines 
     in Juneau, Alaska to the City and Borough of Juneau, Alaska; 
     in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, to The University of Alabama; in 
     Rolla, Missouri, to the University of Missouri-Rolla; and in 
     other localities to such university or government entities as 
     the Secretary deems appropriate.

  Am I correct in assuming that that transfer has not gone through the 
appropriate GSA screening process?
  Mr. GORTON. I would assume that to be the case.
  Mr. McCAIN. On page 68, beginning at line 6, it says--I am requesting 
information on this portion of the bill:

       Provided further, That $2,500,000 of the funds appropriated 
     herein shall be available for a grant to the ``Non-Profit 
     Citizens for the Columbia Gorge Discovery Center'' for the 
     construction of the Columbia Gorge Discovery Center: Provided 
     further, That the Forest Service is authorized to grant the 
     unobligated balance of funds appropriated in fiscal year 1995 
     for the construction of the Columbia Gorge Discovery Center * 
     * * 

  Et cetera, et cetera. Then it goes down further:

       notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds 
     originally appropriated under this head * * * for the Forest 
     Service share of a new research facility at the University of 
     Missouri, Columbia, shall be available for a grant to the 
     University of Missouri, as the Federal share in the 
     construction of the new facility: Provided further, That 
     agreed upon lease of space in the new facility shall be 
     provided to the Forest Service without charge for the life of 
     the building.

  Can the distinguished chairman illuminate me on what the meaning of 
that portion of the bill is?
  Mr. GORTON. The chairman can do so with respect to the Columbia Gorge 
provisions, which are a part of an ongoing project that was involved in 
the creation of the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area in, I believe, 
the year 1986, which at that time authorized various visitors centers 
and the like on both the Washington and Oregon sides of the Columbia 
River within that area, which is almost a form of national park.
  All moneys, to the best of my knowledge, have been appropriated for 
facilities on the Washington side of the river. This is either the end 
or close to the end of the appropriations that had been authorized for 
centers on the Oregon side of the river.
  I suspect when the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Senator 
Hatfield, is on the floor, he may be able to provide more details. But 
to the best of my knowledge, this is the culmination of projects 
authorized by a bill in 1986 and passed then in connection with the 
Columbia Gorge.
  In connection with the Missouri facility--I may have to supplement my 
answer to this, but I cannot give an answer that is much better than 
the text itself--that funds have already been appropriated for the 
Forest Service's share of the research facility at the University of 
Missouri, and this simply turns whatever that original appropriation 
was into a grant, provided that the Forest Service will have room in 
the building when it is completed.

[[Page S 11866]]

  Mr. McCAIN. I want to thank my colleague for his explanation. 
Obviously, I will seek an additional explanation on both of those since 
it has the appearance of earmarking, but I will withhold judgment until 
I am able to receive an explanation on that issue.
  I repeat my concern about the conveyance without reimbursement of 
various facilities without going through the proper screening process.
  As I mentioned, at the appropriate time, I will seek an amendment 
requiring authorization funding for the National Endowment for the 
Arts.
  But in the meantime, I see my friend from Alaska who has, I believe, 
very kindly agreed to change the wording of the language on page 19. I 
am prepared to propose that amendment at the convenience of the manager 
of the bill and the Senator from Alaska. I will be glad to yield to the 
Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I thank the Senator. I was typing up the 
amendment. Does he have it already prepared?
  Mr. McCAIN. I believe momentarily.
  Mr. STEVENS. I think it is coming. I might say to my friend from 
Arizona, Mr. President, it accomplishes the same result. We know that 
that money is earmarked. It merely confirms earmarking, and the 
language puts it on the basis of a permissive action but gives 
attention to the fact that action should be taken.
  I am happy to accept that. I know we will go forward and want it to 
be noted by the Department that it has high congressional priority.
  Mr. McCAIN. I thank my friend from Alaska. I am sure it is a very 
worthwhile project. The Senator from Alaska and I have discussed many 
times my view on this kind of bill language. I believe that this 
language will now allow the Corps of Engineers to make the kind of 
judgment necessary to carry out the work and complete the task as 
envisioned by the Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. President, I do not have the amendment ready at this moment. As 
soon as I receive it, I will propose it, hopefully before the Senator 
from Arkansas begins since I suspect he has a fairly lengthy exposition 
and I perhaps would like to get this done. Here it is.
  Mr. McCAIN. I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its----
  Mr. GORTON. Will the Senator withhold? Does the Senator now have the 
amendment he was speaking about with the Senator from Alaska?
  Mr. STEVENS. Yes.


           Committee Amendment on Page 19, Lines 8 through 14

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I believe I should offer the committee 
amendment found on page 19, lines 8 through 14, as I suspect this is an 
amendment to that committee amendment. Mr. President, I call up the 
committee amendment on page 19, lines 8 to 14.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Committee amendment on page 19, lines 8 through 14.


   Amendment No. 2292 to the Committee Amendment on Page 19, lines 8 
                               through 14

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from Alaska 
for his attention to my amendment. I send the amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 2292 to the committee amendment on page 19, lines 8 
     through 14.

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:
       Strike all in the committee amendment on page 19, lines 8-
     14, and insert in lieu thereof the following: ``Provided 
     further, That funds provided under this head, derived from 
     the Historic Preservation Fund, established by the Historic 
     Preservation Act of 1966 (80 Stat. 915), as amended (16 
     U.S.C. 470), may be available until expended to render sites 
     safe for visitors and for building stabilization''.

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from Alaska. 
I believe this is appropriate, and I have no more remarks on the 
amendment. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is 
on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 2292) was agreed to.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. McCAIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the committee 
amendment on page 19, lines 8 through 14, as amended.
  So the committee amendment, as amended, was agreed to.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. McCAIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


          Committee Amendment on Page 128, Lines 16 through 21

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be able to call 
up, out of order, the committee amendment on page 128, lines 16 to 21, 
to which the amendment of the Senator from Arkansas will be a second-
degree amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Committee amendment on page 128, lines 16 through 21.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.


  Amendment No. 2293 to the Committee Amendment on page 128, lines 16 
                               through 21

  Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Bumpers], for himself, Mr. 
     Lautenberg, Mr. Levin, Mr. Bradley and Mr. Feingold, proposes 
     an amendment numbered 2293 to the committee amendment on page 
     128, lines 16 through 21.

  Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:
       Add the following at the end of the language on lines 16-21 
     on page 128 proposed to be stricken by the Committee 
     amendment:
       ``The provisions of this section shall not apply if the 
     Secretary of Interior determines that, for the claim 
     concerned: (1) a patent application was filed with the 
     Secretary on or before the date of enactment of the fiscal 
     year 1995 Interior Appropriations Act, and (2) all 
     requirements established under Sections 2325 and 2326 of 
     Revised Statutes (30 U.S.C. 29 and 30) for vein or lode 
     claims and Sections 2329, 2330, 2331 and 2333 of the Revised 
     Statutes (30 U.S.C. 35, 36 and 37) for placer claims, and 
     Section 2337 of the Revised Statutes (30 U.S.C. 42) for mill 
     site claims, as the case may be, were fully complied with by 
     the applicant by that date.''

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, before he begins, will the Senator from 
Arkansas yield for a question?
  Mr. BUMPERS. I will be happy to.
  Mr. GORTON. Does the Senator have any idea how long he wishes? Can we 
enter into a unanimous consent agreement on the time?
  Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, I promise you, this is a fairly narrow 
issue. This is not mining law reform. I promise you, while I will not 
unduly delay it, I would like to make my opening argument and see how 
much time we use, and we can use that as a judge as to how much time it 
will take.
  Mr. GORTON. I thank the Senator from Arkansas.
  Mr. REID addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas has the floor.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, as the Senator from Arkansas starts the 
debate, I have tried to work with my colleagues on the other side, and 
it appears at this stage what we probably will do after we finish the 
Senator's debate and say a few words in opposition to it, is move to 
table it at the appropriate time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Snowe). The Senator from Arkansas has the 
floor.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Madam President, in a sense, I hate to stand here and 
make this argument. This is the eighth consecutive year that I have 
tried to bring some sanity and reason to an 1872 law which can only be 
described not as an anachronism, but a scandalous anachronism.
 People who do not understand this issue can be easily deceived by what 
we are talking about. But here 

[[Page S 11867]]
are the simple, basic facts. I have called a few of the freshman 
Senators, and it is very difficult for anybody to believe that the 
practice I am trying to stop is actually going on.

  In 1872, Ulysses Grant signed the 1872 Mining Law. Under that bill, 
people were encouraged to go west and settle. The West was still pretty 
wild. And Congress said, essentially, if you will move out to the West, 
we will let you file claims for hard rock minerals in 20-acre 
increments. You put down four stakes anywhere you want for 20 acres, 
and put down as many as you want. If you want 100 acres, put down 
claims on five 20-acre tracts. If you want 500 acres, put down 25 20-
acre plots. And today, 124 years after Ulysses Grant signed the bill, 
it is still law.
  Do not everybody bolt for the door to rush out west and file claims. 
But if you want to, you can. You just find yourself any one of the 550 
million acres of land that the Federal Government still has open for 
mining and you put your stakes down, and it is yours. You have to pay 
$100 a year if you have more than 25 claims. If you do not, you do not 
pay anything.
  But here is the real kicker: If you find any hard rock minerals--
gold, silver, palladium, platinum--if you can convince the Bureau of 
Land Management that you have any of those hard rock minerals in 
commercial quantities under this land, you can demand a deed. You say, 
I want a deed to this 500 acres. You know something else? They cannot 
refuse you. They have to give you a deed to it.
  So in the last 124 years, we have given away more than 3.2 million 
acres. That is acreage the size of the State of Connecticut. For how 
much? Mr. President, $2.50 an acre. Sometimes, $5 an acre. That is the 
maximum. In that same period of time, $241 billion worth of minerals 
have been taken off that land. And what do you think ``Uncle Sucker'' 
got? He got somewhere between $30 billion and $70 billion in 
reclamation costs to clean up the thousands of mining sites that are 
abandoned and, you guessed it, not a dime in royalties.
  The taxpayers of this country gave away 3.2 million acres of land for 
$2.50 an acre. The mining companies took $241 billion worth of gold and 
silver, and we got the shaft. Now, every time I tell that story to 
somebody, they say you know that could not be true. I have heard a lot 
about corporate welfare. But I have never heard anything even 
approaching this.
  Madam President, do you know what else? Once you get a deed, you do 
not even have to mine it. Do you know what you can do with it? You can 
sell it to somebody for a ski resort. You can sell it to somebody to 
build condominiums on. It is yours, you have a deed to it. Do you know 
something else? Every time we give somebody a deed to that land, that 
means it is theirs, and we can never again charge them a royalty on the 
land.
  What is it about the mining companies that gives them such a 
stranglehold over this body? Last year, for the first time, the 
Interior Appropriations Conference finally included a moratorium and 
said, no more, do not process any more patent applications. We 
grandfathered-in 393 patent applications that were pending. But at 
least that was a step in the right direction. For the first time in 
history, Congress agreed to put a moratorium and say no more patents.
  This year, I am saying let us renew it, let us put this moratorium on 
this year and next year, until we get some kind of reform law through 
here.
  Last year Senator Johnston from Louisiana, the chairman of the Energy 
Committee, negotiated for 18 months--really 2 years --with everybody in 
sight, to try to reach a deal on reform. He gave, he compromised, he 
conciliated, he did everything in the world to try to accommodate 
everybody's concern, but to pass a law that had some sense of sanity to 
it.
  Let me ask every Member of this body, do you think it is fair for a 
new mining company to pay an 18 percent royalty on their lands in 
Nevada? And a few miles away mine gold off Federal lands and not pay 
one red cent? And then argue that if they had to pay a royalty on 
Federal lands the mining companies will all go broke and everybody will 
be without a job? If they mine on private lands, they are happy to pay 
a royalty of 18 percent, and they go like gangbusters. But if you even 
suggest charging them a royalty on Federal lands, or that they not be 
allowed to mine in every national park and wilderness area in the 
United States, they go broke.
  Why is it that the mining companies have such a stranglehold on this 
body? If you want to mine coal on Federal land, that is fine, but you 
pay ``Uncle Sugar'' a 12.5 percent royalty if you take coal off the 
taxpayers' land. On underground mines, some of them a mile deep, think 
of the cost of extracting coal from a mile down. They pay an 8 percent 
royalty. No questions asked. You pay it, or you do not mine. Natural 
gas, 12.5 percent. Oil 12.5 percent. Goal, silver, platinum, palladium, 
all the rest of them, zero. What is the difference? Why is that? Mr. 
President, you need not look any further than the 1872 Mining Law.
  Since the Senate first defeated the patent moratorium in the fiscal 
year 1991 appropriations bill, we have had 468 patent applications 
covering 159,000 acres, 346 first-half final certificates have been 
granted; 79 patents granted covering 11,365 acres; the taxpayers have 
received the handsome sum, for all those patents--``Uncle Sugar's'' 
taxpayers have received the magnificent sum of $56,000, and we have 
given away on those lands $11 billion worth of gold, silver, platinum 
and palladium, and we received not one red cent in royalties.
  Madam President, this amendment is the same one that the Interior 
Appropriations Conference unanimously agreed-to last year. We do not 
disturb the 393 patent applications that we grandfathered-in last year. 
But there are 233 more that are subject to the moratorium. If my 
amendment fails, Madam President, listen to this, all you people who 
are voting to cut Medicare, Medicaid, school lunches, earned income tax 
credits, National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities, Public 
Broadcasting, and all you people voting to eliminate those things or 
cut them very severely, you vote against my amendment and you are 
giving away $11 billion to the biggest corporations in America.
  Go home and defend that one. It must not be tough. I have been 
working on mining law reform for 7 years now. All the news magazines 
have done a segment on this outrageous law. One Senator called me after 
a particularly harsh show on ``Prime Time Live'' and said, ``For God's 
sakes put me on as a cosponsor.'' Two months later when we voted, he 
voted against it. He said his phone was ringing off the wall, and well 
it should be.
  We have the opportunity here to give away $15.5 billion in minerals 
that belong to the taxpayers of this country, while we are trying to 
balance the budget by the year 2002, and cutting dramatically the most 
vulnerable people in America, and giving $15.5 billion to the biggest 
corporations in America.
  Last year, Madam President, on May 16, 1994, the Secretary of the 
Interior was forced to give a Canadian corporation--not even an 
American corporation--a deed to 1,800 acres of land for the princely 
sum of $9,000. That 1,800 acres had 11 billion dollars' worth of gold 
under it.
  People who may be listening to this say two things: No. 1, you know 
he is embellishing that, that could not possibly be true. As bad as it 
is, the Government would never do a thing like that.
  Then they will hear people get up and answer this. They say, ``We 
have offered to pay fair market value.''
  Really? For what?
  ``For the surface.''
  Oh, the surface. ``You are willing to pay fair market value for the 
surface?''
  ``Yes, sir.''
  On that 1,800 acres, the fair market value is about $100 an acre, and 
it has 11 billion dollars' worth of gold under it. Do not fall for that 
fair market value argument. I will give you 100 times more than fair 
market value. Bring me a deed and I will pay you right now, give you 
100 times more than the fair market value of the surface.
  We are not talking about surface. We are talking about what is under 
the surface. The Stillwater Mining Co. is owned by Chevron Resources 
and the Manville Corp., a couple of local paupers. This mine is located 
in the Custer and Gallatin National Forest in Montana, 35 miles north 
of Yellowstone.
  In 1990, I came within two votes of getting a moratorium exactly like 
the 

[[Page S 11868]]
one I am proposing today. I came within two votes in 1990 of getting 
that moratorium put on. Four days later, the Stillwater Mining Co. 
filed an application for patents on 2,036 acres--scared to death 
because I came within two votes of stopping these outrageous practices. 
Do you know what is under that 2,036 acres? This is their figure, not 
mine--this is what they say--225 million ounces of platinum and 
palladium worth $38 billion. For the princely sum of $5 an acre, 
Stillwater will pay to Uncle Sugar, a total of $10,180, and we will 
deed the Stillwater Mining Co. 225 million ounces of palladium and 
platinum worth $38 billion.
  I do not know how you explain this to your constituents. You do not, 
because it never comes up. My father used to say: ``Everybody's 
business is nobody's business,'' and this is where it comes in. Very 
few people outside the roughly 11 Western States even know about the 
issue.
  This is not an antiwestern issue. It is not antianything. It is 
simple justice for the taxpayers of this country.
  A family in Oregon got a deed under this process for 780 acres of 
land of sand--believe this--sand. They wanted the sand, so they bought 
it for $1,950, 780 acres of sand. Guess where it was? It was in the 
National Dunes Recreation area of Oregon, and they paid $1,950 for it. 
There was a hue and cry about selling this sand in a national 
recreation area. So we started negotiating to get it back. The family 
had paid $1,950 for the land. What do you think they want for it back, 
Senator? Somewhere between $11 million and $12 million.
  Now, this is not only not collecting royalty, this is having to give 
somebody $11 million to $12 million back because we should not have 
sold it to them in the first place.
  In 1983, a speculator demanded a deed for 160 acres of Forest Service 
land near the Keystone Ski Resort. He got it for $400. He sold 44 acres 
for $500,000. I do not know why anybody stays in the Senate. We ought 
to be all out West with our pickaxes. If you do not have a pickax, just 
send your application in.
  In 1987, while DOE was examining Yucca Mountain as a possible nuclear 
waste site, a man went in and filed for 27 claims for $135, and DOE 
paid him $249,000, almost immediately, for the land. We gave him the 
land for $400 and turned right around and paid him back $249,500.
  Have you had enough? I will give you one more.
  In 1987 the Government sold land just outside the city of Phoenix to 
a miner for $2.50 an acre, and 10 years later, 10 years later he sold 
the land to a resort developer for $400,000 plus an 11 percent interest 
in the resort.
  When I first started discussing this subject, a Senator on the other 
side, a man who is not here anymore, a fine Senator, a man I respected 
greatly and I thought if there was anyone over there who would like to 
join me on this, he would be it, I gave him the pitch you just heard me 
give, ``How about joining with me as a sponsor?"
  He said, ``No, I am heading for Nevada so I can file a claim.'' I 
applauded his honesty.
  Mr. President, I wish every Member of the body were here because I 
would really like to see 100 Senators sitting in their seats and ask 
this question:
  How many times have you told the Chamber of Commerce about how 
terrible the deficit is? How many times have you told them you are 
going to do everything you can to get the deficit down? How many times 
have you told them and the Rotary club, ``I will treat your money like 
it were my own"?
  Really?
  I used to own a farm. I sold it about a year ago and it broke my 
heart. I suddenly realized I was not going to build that dream home 
overlooking the lake on my farm. I never made any money. Made enough to 
pay the taxes and keep the fences up, but I loved it. And under that 
farm was some natural gas. If somebody had come to me and said, 
``Senator Bumpers, we are going to set up a well over here; we are 
going to take this gas out from under your land.''
  ``Now wait, just a minute.''
  ``No. The Government gave us a deed to it, so we want to set up shop 
here and we are going to take your gas.''
  What would you say, Senator? If you had a 12-gauge handy, you would 
order them off your land.
  Do you know what the landowner out in Nevada said to Newmont Mining 
Company? ``Sure, come in here and mine this gold. Just give us 18 
percent of anything you sell it for.''
  I do not want to belabor this. I want to talk about it long enough 
that people have some semblance of an idea of what an outrageous 
scandal it is to continue giving away the Federal domain for $2.50 an 
acre. Three years ago, in talking about this, some of the Senators from 
the West said they would consider paying a 3 percent royalty on the net 
profits. I had always held out for 8 percent of the gross income, or a 
net smelter return, which is the common practice for royalties on 
private land. Eight percent probably--certainly not in this climate--is 
not realistic. At the time we discussed this 3 years ago, when the 
industry said a royalty would bankrupt them, gold was $333 an ounce. 
Today it is exactly $50 higher than that, $383 an ounce. Platinum has 
gone from $354 to $422, $68 dollars more per ounce than it was at the 
beginning of the 103rd Congress.
  But today--you see, they could have paid an 8 percent gross royalty 
and just think how much more they would still have than they had then. 
But today you suggest a 3 or 4 percent royalty: ``Oh, it will bankrupt 
us. It will put us out of business.''
  Let me refresh your memory on what this amendment does and what it 
does not do. You make up your own mind. If you want to go home and 
defend this, be my guest. All I ask of you is just be honest when you 
are defending it.
  My amendment reinstates the moratorium against the Interior 
Department processing any new patent applications. Bear in mind, there 
are 393 patent applications that were grandfathered-in last year. When 
the Conference agreed to this, I knew that mining law reform would not 
be enacted.
  The Senator from Louisiana [Mr. Johnston] worked his heart out last 
year to try to enact reform. And at the last minute, when everybody 
knew it was too late--``Sorry, we just do not have time to do it this 
year.''
  All I am trying to do is reinstate exactly what we did last year, put 
a moratorium on patenting, let the 393 applicants go forward. But for 
God's sake, do not add any more.
  And finally, on a more pathetic note, I have always admitted to be a 
social liberal and a fiscal conservative. I have stood behind that desk 
and shouted to the rooftops, just as I have tonight, trying to warn 
people about what the deficits are doing to this Nation, and it often 
fell on deaf ears.
  Let me ask you this. If you can explain to people why you are going 
to do this, also explain to them how you had to cut education by 30 
percent over the next 7 years. Explain to them why you had to cut 
Medicare by $270 billion. Explain to them why you had to cut Medicaid 
$170 billion.
  Explain to them why you had to cut Earned Income Tax Credits, the 
best program the Nation ever had to keep people off welfare. Explain to 
them why the only civilized thing their children get a chance to see is 
on PBS, and they want to torpedo that--cannot afford it.
  Explain to them why you want to cut the Endowment for the Humanities, 
which trains 3,500 teachers every year in civilized conduct, and they 
go back home and they pass their lessons, what they learned, on to 
500,000 students--you have to cut that out. The National Endowment for 
the Arts--it is not all pornography, you know. It is ``The Civil War,'' 
it is ``Baseball,'' it is the Arkansas Symphony--we have to cut all 
those things out.
  At the same time Senators, go home to your constituents and try to 
explain how you voted to continue to give away public land and billions 
of dollars worth of minerals. Houdini could not perform that trick and 
get away with it.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. JOHNSTON. Madam President, I hope we will support the Bumpers 
amendment. As Senator Bumpers indicated, we worked in the last Congress 
very hard to get a mining law reform bill. There was a lot of good-
faith work by a lot of people on both sides of the issue. But, Madam 
President, at no point was it ever seriously considered that we give 
away the public land by patenting for $2.50 an acre. The companies know 
better than that. They know 

[[Page S 11869]]
that this is a giveaway program. They are not even trying for that when 
it comes to serious negotiations on the mining law reform bill.
  Madam President, if we give away the public land for $2.50 an acre, 
it does not pass the straight-face test. There is nobody who can stand 
here on the floor of this Senate and say that is seriously what we 
ought to do, because we all know better. The companies no better.
  Madam President, we have still some chance in this Congress to get a 
mining law reform bill. The bigger companies--I have talked to them--
really understand the dynamic. They understand, first of all, the 
political dynamic. They understand that the people of this country are 
getting a rising tide of disgust at what we are giving away with the 
mining law bill. The 1879 mining law bill needs reform. They know it. 
They are willing to do it.
  Frankly, it is many of the smaller companies which are not willing to 
join in a coalition to get a mining law reform bill. It is only a 
matter of time. I have counseled with those bigger companies and have 
told them that, in my judgment, it is in their interest to get a mining 
law reform bill this year. They know the general outlines of that bill. 
And the general outlines are you have to end patenting because the 
people of the country can understand this. There are many things that 
the people of this country cannot understand, such as complicated 
formulas, tax provisions, corporate provisions. Some of these laws that 
we put here, they cannot understand. They can understand patenting. 
They can understand getting the public domain at $2.50 an acre, and 
they know that is wrong. It is simple. It is clear. It is 
understandable, and it is, in the minds of the people of this country, 
outrageous.
  So I hope we will vote for the Bumpers amendment. Then I hope that we 
will work in the rest of this Congress to get a fair and good mining 
law reform bill.
  As I told my colleagues from the West last year as we were trying to 
perfect a mining law reform bill, I believe we can put together a fair 
mining law reform bill that does not cost one single job in the West--
not one; that does not break or bankrupt any company--not one company; 
but which gets for the American taxpayer, gets for Americans across 
this country, a fair return on what is theirs, what belongs to all 
Americans, that is, the public domain.
  So, Madam President, I hope we will support the Bumpers amendment. It 
is fair. If this amendment should fail to pass, and we patent for $2.50 
an acre all those amounts of the public domain, it will not set well 
with the American public. It will not set well with the American 
public. And that, believe me, is something they can understand. I hope 
we will vote for the Bumpers amendment.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, I thank the Chair.
  This is not the first time that we have debated the Bumpers amendment 
on appropriations with regard to the mining bill and the patent issue, 
specifically. I rise today in opposition to the amendment offered by 
the Senator from Arkansas.
  There are lots of arguments that have been used and a lot of 
generalizations that have been made. But what we all agree on is that 
mining law reform should be done appropriately in the authorizing 
committee. We all agree further that there is a need for substantial 
reform, and we have initiated a bill. We have had considerable 
discussion in the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. The 
realization is that every Member agrees that we need this reform.
  But the question today is, are we going to pass mining law 
legislation as part of an appropriations bill? Most Members would say, 
no, we should not do that.
  I am chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, 
and I can assure each Member of the Senate that we have made extensive 
progress on comprehensive reform.
  This is a difficult domestic issue. It is an issue ultimately of 
whether we are going to depend on imported minerals coming into this 
country and export our dollars and export our jobs, or are going to be 
able to continue to sustain a mining industry that provides high-paying 
jobs in this country.
  Make no mistake about it. One of the interesting reflections we hear 
all of the time from the labor community is, What is happening to the 
high-paying jobs in this country? We have more people employed, but the 
job pay range is lower. It is quite obvious; we are not developing our 
resources in mining, in oil and gas, and in timber. We are simply 
importing those resources and exporting our dollars.
  We have held hearings on mining law legislation before the Energy and 
Natural Resources Committee. We are getting closer to reaching an 
agreement. There is no question in my mind as chairman that we have 
enough votes currently to report out a bill. A mining claim patent 
moratorium is going to delay that process. Moratoriums, such as the one 
offered by the Senator from Arkansas, become the means by which 
Congress avoids its responsibility under the law and to make changes in 
statutes such as the mining laws.
  The moratorium is going to slow it down. It is going to perhaps kill 
any incentive that exists at the present time to complete action on 
this comprehensive bill. And I am sure my friend from Arkansas would 
agree.
  We have heard these horror stories from Senator Bumpers each year--
they get better each year--about the Federal land giveaway. Yet, when 
given the opportunity, he apparently wants to take away the very 
incentives which should drive Members to enact comprehensive reform. It 
is not a giveaway. He does not address the investment that goes into 
exploration and the realization that in many cases when you are looking 
for reserves which you do not find, or if you do find them, you do not 
find enough of them, or you may find an ore body and it dribbles out 
and it is lost, and, as a consequence, the ability for the investment 
to make a recovery is a relatively high-risk prospect.
  Maintaining the status quo--what effect does it have on the mining 
industry? It certainly has none. If we are proceeding with a bill with 
which we want to enact true reform, then it is the authorizing 
committee that has the responsibility to complete action on a 
comprehensive bill. And that is what we are doing.
  The rules for patent application are steeped with longstanding 
agreements and legal history in accordance with Federal law. Compliance 
is costly. Compliance is time consuming. Many people fail to recognize 
that. They think one goes out and simply picks up and sells the 
minerals. By the time a miner has filed a patent application--in many 
cases, they have invested tens of thousands of dollars, in some cases, 
millions of dollars--in proving the discovery of a valuable mineral 
deposit. You do not locate it without a significant investment of time. 
You have to prove it up. It has to be able to sustain the investment 
necessary to bring about a return on the investment.
  There are some claims that have been discovered that are rich, and 
apparently the risk associated with the investment has provided a 
handsome return. But there are hundreds of thousands that have been 
expended in what constitutes dry holes in the sense of an oil 
reference, but in minerals that simply have been petered out because 
they have not been able to sustain either the quantity or quality 
necessary to develop it.
  A moratorium is a kind of misguided Federal policy that simply 
creates confusion and distrust among the American people and tramples 
on their inherent rights. And those rights involve private property. We 
have an obligation here under the sanctity of private property, and the 
mining law created a system by which citizens of this country are 
awarded real property rights in mineral lands in return for developing 
a valuable mineral deposit.
  The generalization is, well, this is a giveaway.
  How is it a giveaway? They go out; they make expenditures; they do 
exploration. And if, indeed, they develop that property, they provide 
employment; they pay taxes; and they generate a return. I can show you 
each year mines that shut down. They do not shut down because they did 
not find ore. The ore is not rich enough to 

[[Page S 11870]]
sustain the investment and as a consequence they have to shut down and 
lay people off work.
  The Supreme Court has held that the right conveyed in a patent is a 
property right in the highest sense of the term. The Senator from 
Arkansas wants to do away with that. Senator Bumpers' amendment 
grandfathers a few patent applications currently pending at the 
Interior Department but his amendment also tramples on numerous pending 
patent applications.
  There is already a de facto moratorium on processing patents, and 
that is as a consequence of the prevailing attitude at the Department 
of Interior. Secretary Babbitt has made no secret of the fact that he 
strongly opposes the patent system under current law. The Secretary has 
taken numerous actions designed to indefinitely delay processing of 
pending mining mill site claim patent applications.
  In fact, for the first 2 years of Babbitt's tenure the Department of 
Interior did not issue a single, not a single mining or mill site claim 
under existing law except what the Court ordered the Secretary to do.
  Now, two Federal courts have ruled that the delays caused by the 
Secretary's action have been unreasonable and unfounded. As a result of 
the Secretary's de facto moratorium, we have seen a huge backlog of 
patent applications develop. We all know that even if the amendment of 
the Senator from Arkansas fails, the Secretary of the Interior is going 
to continue his de facto moratorium, so in essence Senator Bumpers' 
amendment is more politics than substance.
  In reality, Madam President, the amendment offered by Senator Bumpers 
is unnecessary and we should defeat the Bumpers amendment. Let the 
Energy Committee complete its action on comprehensive reform, debate 
that bill in the Chamber of the Senate, because as I have indicated 
before we do have the votes to vote it out of committee, and not fool 
with a piecemeal moratorium on appropriations bills.
  Now, Madam President, by defeating the Bumpers amendment, I think we 
can send a strong message, a message that needs to be sent, to the 
authorizing committee to enact comprehensive reform.
  Let us talk about that comprehensive reform because it has been 
addressed by the Senator from Arkansas and others. Make no mistake, 
Madam President, on the issue of patents miners should be required to 
pay fair market value for the surface estate. That is what we propose 
in our legislation, fair market value for the surface estate.
  So do not tell me this is a giveaway. It is not a giveaway. We are 
talking about fair market value. Some people have a way of generalizing 
and seeing what they want to see and not listening and not 
understanding what the intent of this reform is. They would pay fair 
market value for the surface estates.
  Now, we have heard a lot of conversation about speculation or using 
patents for nonmining purposes. That has happened in the past, but it 
will not happen again. The National Mining Association supports this 
legislation. They agree that miners should be prohibited from using 
future patented lands for anything but good-faith mining purposes. If 
the land is used for other purposes, Madam President, we should require 
the land to revert back to the Federal Government.
  Now, let us make sure we understand the reforms we are talking about. 
You pay fair market value for the patent, unlike the characterization 
of my friend from Arkansas, who says this is a giant giveaway.
  Speculation or using patents for nonmining purposes would end under 
the proposed legislation. You could not use it for anything other than 
good-faith mining purposes. If you use it for anything else or attempt 
to, it goes back in the Federal domain.
  Now, the issue of royalty, talking about what is a return to the 
Federal Government. We should assure that the Federal Government 
receives a fair return on all minerals production by imposing a net 
royalty.
  Some Members of this body have suggested that true mining reform must 
impose the same concept of gross royalty on hard rock minerals as 
applies to the oil and gas industry. But those who suggest that fail to 
understand the difference between the two industries and that both the 
net royalty and gross royalty basically achieve the same results. It 
depends on how they are structured.
  Mineral production and oil and gas extraction are fundamentally 
different operations. Oil and gas are removed in almost a marketable 
condition. Very little has to be done. Gas comes out and you condition 
the gas. The oil comes out and you take some of the residue out of it. 
But you basically have, when you take it out of the ground, a salable 
product at that point. But gold, silver, copper, hard rock minerals are 
extracted in a raw form. When you roll that mineral out of the mine, 
you have basically a big rock in front of the mine. What is it worth? 
Nothing. It may have gold in it, copper in it, silver in it. But in 
that form it is a rock-like material. Raw ore is almost valueless until 
a mining company has added the significant value to the product. That 
means transporting it to a mill. That means crushing it. That means 
recovering the ore. That means disposing of the rock. That means the 
reclamation process back in the mine.
  Recognizing that these costs are necessary, to put the hard rock 
mining royalty on a par with the oil and gas industry is simply not 
applicable. You have these steps that have to be taken--concentrating, 
smelting. When you take the mineral out of the mill, then you have it 
in a powder form. You have to take it to smelting, put it in the 
furnace. These are all unlike the availability of a product that is 
salable when it comes out of an oil or gas well.
  Now, on the issue of reclamation, the mining law should give the 
States the primacy for assuring that surface effects from mineral 
activities are reclaimed. We have reclamation in the bill. We have the 
Western Governors Association which opposes restrictive Federal 
standards that many believe can be seen as another unfunded mandate 
from Washington. We have had enough of unfunded mandates. In addition, 
let us not forget the position of the National Academy of Sciences. It 
has concluded that uniform reclamation standards similar to those 
applicable to reclamation of coal mine lands are not appropriate for 
hard rock mining. So we have a difference.
  In short, mining law reform should protect the U.S. mining industry, 
protect U.S. jobs, protect the environment, and provide a fair return 
to the U.S. Treasury. That is just what we are attempting to do with my 
comprehensive mining law reform legislation.
  Now, Senator Bumpers has been at this a lot longer than I have 
relative to his efforts to terminate the mining industry in the United 
States as we know it today. Under the direction of my good friend from 
Arkansas you would have prescribed a royalty that would simply drive 
the industry out of the United States.
  We have seen the experiments in Mexico and Canada where they have 
developed a royalty system very similar to that which was proposed by 
the Senator from Arkansas, and they have revised it because it simply 
has not worked. It has resulted in the industry moving out of both 
Mexico and Canada.
  We ought to learn something by experience around here. The Bumpers 
amendment may look good on the surface, but like any book, when one 
begins to read the text, one quickly learns that one should not judge a 
book by its cover.
  Mining law reform belongs in the Energy Committee, not in the fiscal 
year 1996 Interior appropriations bill. Some of the senior Members who 
have argued long and fast for legislation on appropriations should be 
sensitive to authorizing legislation on an appropriations bill. Senator 
Bumpers has offered similar amendments in the past. Each time this body 
has opposed his proposal based on the same logic that I am proposing 
that you consider here today.
  So I would urge my colleagues to defeat the Bumpers amendment, 
resolve mining law reform through the legislative process, not the 
appropriations process.
  Mr. JOHNSTON addressed the Chair.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. I promise, Madam President, to yield the floor to 
Senator Craig.
  Mr. JOHNSTON. Would the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. I would be happy to.
  Mr. JOHNSTON. As my chairman knows, I have sent him a letter to the 

[[Page S 11871]]
  effect that I believe we could pass mining law reform based on three 
principles. First, an end of patenting; second, what we call a net 
smelt royalty of 2.5 percent; and, third, an assurance that we give 
away no powers that are presently held by the Secretary of the Interior 
with respect to the ability to regulate mines. Those three principles, 
as I said in my letter to the distinguished chairman from Alaska, I 
believe would get us a bill that would not only have strong bipartisan 
support, but could be signed by the President.
  Does the Senator acknowledge that that offer is out on the table now 
in effect from those of us on this side of the aisle?
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. I would be happy to respond to my good friend from 
Louisiana relative to his points on the net smelt or the end of 
patenting.
  The concern that we have expressed time and time again is relative to 
value. And we are proposing that the patent reflect a fair market 
value. We further propose that there be a mandate that would eliminate 
the use of that land for anything other than its intended mining 
purposes.
  Now, there is a concern in the committee relative to the authority of 
the Secretary of the Interior. There is a certain sensitivity about not 
duplicating oversight, not taking away from the States the inherent 
right that they would have, say, to control and have authority over 
water issues, which obviously the States are very sensitive to.
  So, I think we are very close to accommodating most of these 
concerns. But the devil is in the details.
  Again, the Senator from Arkansas wants to eliminate patenting. We are 
suggesting that we pay a fair market value, that the small miners have 
an assurance that they have the right to patent. It is not so much an 
issue for the larger corporations that have the sophistication 
internally to have the assurance that their interests are protected.
  We have also proposed that there be a reverter back to the Federal 
Government upon a determination that either the mine has been worked 
out--then the land could go back to the Federal Government.
  So on many issues the Senator from Louisiana, as former chairman and 
ranking member of the Energy Committee, and others, have worked 
together and I think have made accommodations. As I have indicated--the 
Senator, I think he is aware of this--that the Secretary of the 
Interior--he and I have had conversations about a willingness to try 
and work out something to resolve this issue. But clearly the position 
of the Bumpers amendment, with a moratorium, circumvents that effort. I 
think it puts us substantially behind our goals of reaching 
accommodation.
  Mr. JOHNSTON. Would the Senator from Alaska agree with me that the 
offer which I made on behalf of this side of the aisle and this 
administration is still on the table? That is, any time we want to get 
a reform of the 1879 mining law reform bill, based upon an end of 
patenting, 2.5 percent smelt royalty and giving away no present powers, 
that bill can be put together at--I will not say on a moment's notice--
but I think very quickly.
  I just wanted to assure my colleague that that offer is still in 
existence.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. I thank my friend from Louisiana. Again, I do not 
think we are that far apart in the legislative language. That is why I 
would urge all of my friends to vote against the Bumpers amendment and 
recognize the advancements that we are making and the fact that we will 
have a bill before this body in the near future.
  Mr. CRAIG addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.


                Amendment No. 2294 to Amendment No. 2293

  Mr. CRAIG. Let me join with my colleague from Alaska who is chairman 
of the full Energy and Natural Resources Committee and the argument I 
think he has so clearly just placed before this Senate as it relates to 
a Senate bill that I introduced some months ago, S. 506, which reforms 
the 1872 mining law, and deals with the very issue that the Senator 
from Arkansas is attempting to deal with this evening.
  It recognizes the patenting process which those of us who I think 
understand mining on public lands recognize as a clear and necessary 
part of causing private industry, be it a small miner or a large miner, 
to gain access to those properties for the purpose of mining.
  Now, there have been a variety of other approaches argued over the 
years. But none of them seem to work in the sense of being able to 
allow that person to have title to the property and the surface of that 
property so they can begin to develop a mining operation. There is no 
question that there are those like the Senator from Arkansas who view 
the ability to block patents as a way to block access to the resources 
of our public lands.
  The thing that I think most of us recognize, and clearly I recognize 
in S. 506, is that patenting was an important process. But the 1872 
mining law bestowed that property right on an individual who had 
brought forth a valid claim. That property right was bestowed for $2.50 
an acre. That is obsolete.
  And it is the $2.50-an-acre clause, if you will, provision within the 
law, that most people have been able to hang their hat on as an 
effective argument for saying for some reason we are simply giving away 
the public domain, failing to recognize the millions and millions of 
dollars that has to be put on that $2.50 land for that property and 
that resource to become productive, and as a productive resource to 
employ people, to pay taxes, and to do the very kinds of things that 
those of us who are guardians, if you will, of the public domain 
believe to be a responsible use of that resources estate.
  So historically the surface of the land was of little value, not of 
no value, but a very limited value. And the Government in 1872--the 
Government today should not use the value of the land as a barrier to 
gain access to the resource below it, the mineral estate for that 
mineral being used in the economy of our country to employ people, to 
serve our industrial base, and to do all that we have always expected 
our minerals and our natural resources to do for us.
  So, in S. 506, what I say in proposing that legislation that is 
before the committee is that we do fair market value. Let us take that 
issue away. Let us do not offer that argument anymore of $2.50 an acre. 
Let us deal with fair market value.
  Well, how do we arrive at it? There is really no magical process at 
all. It is simply the standard appraisal process that the BLM would use 
in this instance of equivalent values of acreage during the patenting 
process to allow that title to pass for value, in this case, fair 
market value.
  Now, in some Western States that might be as low as $100 an acre 
because that is what the surface value would go for of like lands in 
the immediate area. And most of these lands we recognize oftentimes are 
a long ways away from any private property of value to use as a 
comparative in the appraisal process. So I think that is not a 
difficult thing to arrive at. That is exactly what we have been trying 
to arrive at.
  We have offered legislation in good faith. We have held a hearing. We 
have been in negotiations. And yet this administration wants something 
substantially different. In most instances, they have already argued 
they would like to prohibit mining on public lands. They no longer view 
it as a compatible use of our natural resources and, in many instances, 
they have proposed ideas that would be so restrictive that the mining 
industry that operates in our country today would choose not to mine 
anymore, and they would go as they are now going: Offshore to foreign 
countries to invest their money where they can receive a much higher 
rate of return with much fewer Federal regulations with which to 
comply.
  I believe, and I think many Senators do believe, that public policy 
says that mining of public resources for the value of our country, our 
mineral estate, our industrial base and for employment is a good public 
policy. So then let us be allowed in a reasonable fashion to move 
through authorizing legislation to assure that that public policy 
exists.
  We have tried to now for 4 years, and the Senator from Louisiana, 
when he chaired that committee last year, in good faith tried. But you 
cannot please everyone and, in many instances, those accommodations 
were tried and simply failed, and today we believe we have a good bill. 


[[Page S 11872]]

  We have sat down in good faith with the Senator from Louisiana to 
negotiate, and I believe he has attempted to negotiate in good faith. 
Yet, we have not arrived at anything, largely. Yes, the offer is still 
on the table, but I can tell you in all fairness, I am tremendously 
disappointed that the kind of offer back that we get is so penalizing 
and so restrictive to the ability to produce a viable industry on the 
public land resource that we are trying to, in a responsible way, offer 
out to the public simply disallows us from moving forward.
  As a result of that deleterious kind of amendment, as that offered by 
the Senator from Arkansas, that says no more patenting, a patent 
moratorium--in other words, shut the industry down until the Congress 
can function, but the Congress cannot function because the Congress 
cannot agree.
  So when you put a moratorium on patenting, you have really put a 
moratorium on future mining, and if there is no future in future mining 
in this country, then the industrial base, the mining base of that base 
begins to move offshore, because the resources that are being mined 
today in the mines that are operating today, like all mines, some day 
will wither away, the resource is used, it is completely depleted, and 
that mine has to close.
  To maintain a successful industrial base and viable mining industry, 
there always has to be a future, there has to be the ability to 
explore, the ability to discover, the ability to claim, and the ability 
to patent, to gain the fee title to that property so that the mining 
operation can continue.
  It is with those concerns this evening that I approach this 
amendment, as we have in the past, from the Senator from Arkansas. And 
I must say in all fairness, the arguments we have heard tonight are not 
new arguments. The arguments the Senator from Arkansas has used have 
been used year after year. If you cannot find new arguments, where is 
the problem?
  Most of us recognize that the problem did exist, the problem was 
there, but the problem no longer exists today, largely because of this 
Senate's responsibility and concern about the environment and the 
putting of the environmental laws in place that has made the modern 
mining industry of today substantially different than it was 30 years 
ago.
  But the 30-year-old arguments still get drawn to the public eye. The 
straw person, if you will, of this is the past and not the present. So 
not only do we have to argue about the future, we have to convince many 
of us that the current situation is OK. I believe it is, and I believe 
the mining industry of this country is a responsible industry that 
performs in an environmentally sound way, complying with the Clean 
Water Act and complying with the Clean Air Act and doing what they must 
do inside the regulatory structure that our Government, through public 
policy formulated by this Senate, has provided. That is not at issue.
  Then what is the problem? Why is this amendment deleterious? Why 
would it shut down the industry? For the simple reason that it 
forecloses the opportunity of a future; it forecloses the ability of 
the industry to go out and explore and gain patent and be able to have 
the assurance of future resource for future development as the current 
resource grows progressively depleted.
  It is with those concerns that tonight I offer a second-degree 
amendment, and I send that to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  Mr. CRAIG. A second-degree amendment to the Bumpers amendment that 
would require a fair market value.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Madam President, can we have the amendment read?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Idaho [Mr. Craig] for himself, Mr. Reid, 
     and Mr. Bryan, proposes an amendment numbered 2294 to 
     amendment No. 2293.

  Mr. BUMPERS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:
       Strike all the language in the amendment and insert in lieu 
     thereof the following:

     ``SEC. (a). FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR MINERAL PATENTS.

       ``Except as provided in subsection (c), any patent issued 
     by the United States under the general mining laws after the 
     date of enactment of this Act shall be issued only upon 
     payment by the owner of the claim of the fair market value 
     for the interest in the land owned by the United States 
     exclusive of and without regard to the mineral deposits in 
     the land or the use of the land. For the purposes of this 
     section. ``general mining laws'' means those Acts which 
     generally comprise chapters 2, 11, 12, 12A, 15, and 16, and 
     sections 161 and 162, of Title 30 of the United States Code, 
     all Acts heretofore enacted which are amendatory of or 
     supplementary to any of the foregoing Acts, and the judicial 
     and administrative decisions interpreting such Acts.

     ``SEC. (b). RIGHT OF REENTRY.

       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (c), 
     and notwithstanding any other provision of law, a patent 
     issued under subsection (a) shall be subject to a right of 
     reentry by the United States if it is used by the patentee 
     for any purpose other than for conducting mineral activities 
     in good faith and such unauthorized use is not discontinued 
     as provided in subsection (b)(2). For the purpose of this 
     section, the term ``mineral activities'' means any activity 
     related to, or incidental to, exploration for or development, 
     mining, production, beneficiation, or processing of any 
     locatable mineral or mineral that would be locatable if it 
     were on Federal land, or reclamation of the impacts of such 
     activities.
       ``(2) Notice by the secretary.--If the patented estate is 
     used by the patentee for any purpose other than for 
     conducting mineral activities in good faith, the Secretary of 
     the Interior shall serve on all owners of interests in such 
     patented estate, in the manner prescribed for service of a 
     summons and complaint under the Federal Rules of Civil 
     Procedure, notice specifying such unauthorized use and 
     providing not more than 90 days in which such unauthorized 
     use must be terminated. The giving of such notice shall 
     constitute final agency action appealable by any owner of an 
     interest in such patented estate. The Secretary may exercise 
     the right of reentry as provided in subsection (b)(3) if such 
     unauthorized use has not been terminated in the time provided 
     in this paragraph, and only after all appeal rights have 
     expired and any appeals of such notice have been finally 
     determined.
       ``(3) Right of reentry.--The Secretary may exercise the 
     right of the United States to reenter such patented estate by 
     filing a declaration of reentry in the office of the Bureau 
     of Land Management designated by the Secretary and recording 
     such declaration where the notice
      or certificate of location for the patented claim or site is 
     recorded under State law. Upon the filing and recording of 
     such declaration, all right, title and interest in such 
     patented estate shall revert to the United States. Lands 
     and interests in lands for which the United States 
     exercises its right of reentry under this section shall 
     remain open to the location of mining claims and mill 
     sites, unless withdrawn under other applicable law.

     ``SEC. (c). PATENTS EXCEPTED FROM REQUIREMENTS.

       ``The requirements of subsections (a) and (b) of this Act 
     shall not apply to the issuance of those patents whose 
     applications were excepted under section 113 of Pub. L. No. 
     103-322, 108 Stat. 2499, 2519 (1994), from the prohibition on 
     funding contained in Section 112 of that Act. Such patents 
     shall be issued under the general mining laws in effect prior 
     to the date of enactment of this Act.

     ``SEC. (d). PROCESSING OF PENDING PATENT APPLICATIONS.

       ``(1) Processing schedule.--For those applications for 
     patent under the general mining laws which are pending at the 
     date of enactment of this Act, or any amendments to or 
     resubmittals of such patent applications, the Secretary of 
     the Interior shall--
       ``(A) Within three months of the enactment of this Act, 
     file with the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 
     and the Committee on Resources of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural 
     Resources of the United States Senate a plan which details 
     how the Department of the Interior will take final action on 
     all such applications within two years of the enactment of 
     this Act and file reports annually thereafter with the same 
     committees detailing actions taken by the Department of the 
     Interior to carry out such plan; and
       ``(B) Take such actions as may be necessary to carry out 
     such plan.
       ``(2) Mineral examinations.--Upon the request of a patent 
     applicant, the Secretary of the Interior shall allow the 
     applicant to fund the retention by the Bureau of Land 
     Management of a qualified third-party contractor to conduct a 
     mineral examination of the mining claims or mill sites 
     contained in a patent application. All such third-party 
     mineral examinations shall be conducted in accordance with 
     standard procedures and criteria followed by the Bureau of 
     Land Management, and the retention and compensation of such 
     third-party contractors shall be conducted in accordance with 
     procedures employed by the Bureau of Land Management in the 
     retention of third-party contractors for the preparation of 
     environmental analyses under the National Environmental 
     Policy Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 4321-4370d) to the maximum 
     extent practicable.''.


[[Page S 11873]]

  Mr. CRAIG. Madam President, I retain the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho has the time.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Madam President, was my request to stop reading the 
amendment granted?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes.
  Several Senators addressed the Chair.


          Committee Amendment on Page 128, Lines 16 through 21

  Mr. BUMPERS. Madam President, I move to table the underlying 
amendment and ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  Mr. BUMPERS. The underlying committee amendment.
  Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The underlying amendment is not before us.
  Mr. REID. I object.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Madam President, he cannot object to the request for a 
quorum call.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  Mr. CRAIG. I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Santorum). Objection is heard.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk continued calling the roll.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GORTON. What is the pending business?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pending question is the motion to table 
the committee amendment.
  Mr. GORTON. Parliamentary inquiry. Will that motion to table, if it 
is accepted, take not only the committee amendment but the Bumpers 
amendment and the Craig second-degree amendment with it?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion to table will only take down the 
committee amendment. It would not take down the Bumpers and Craig 
amendments. They would be pending after the motion to table.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, were the yeas and nays ordered?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. They were not ordered.
  Mr. BUMPERS. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a 
sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. Helms] 
and the Senator from Florida [Mr. Mack] are necessarily absent.
  Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. Breaux] is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 46, nays 51, as follows:
                      [Rollcall Vote No. 372 Leg.]

                                YEAS--46

     Akaka
     Biden
     Boxer
     Bradley
     Bumpers
     Byrd
     Coats
     Cohen
     Conrad
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Exon
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Glenn
     Graham
     Gregg
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Jeffords
     Johnston
     Kassebaum
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Mikulski
     Moseley-Braun
     Moynihan
     Murray
     Nunn
     Pell
     Pryor
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Sarbanes
     Simon
     Snowe
     Wellstone

                                NAYS--51

     Abraham
     Ashcroft
     Baucus
     Bennett
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Brown
     Bryan
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Cochran
     Coverdell
     Craig
     D'Amato
     Dole
     Domenici
     Faircloth
     Ford
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Hatfield
     Heflin
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Kempthorne
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Packwood
     Pressler
     Reid
     Santorum
     Shelby
     Simpson
     Smith
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Breaux
     Helms
     Mack
  So the motion to lay on the table the committee amendment on page 
128, lines 16 through 21, was rejected.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
motion was rejected.
  Mr. BRYAN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, what is now the pending business?


                           Amendment No 2294

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question occurs on the Craig amendment 
number 2294.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, we have had a fairly extensive debate on 
this general issue of mining patents. We now have a second-degree 
amendment before us in behalf of Senator Craig.
  I wonder if I could ask the principals whether or not we could have a 
relatively short time agreement on the second-degree amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, if I could respond to the manager of the 
bill, perhaps 30 minutes evenly divided. I would agree to a reasonable 
time limit as long as there is agreement on the Bumpers amendment, 
which has already been extensively debated. So I think we should have a 
time agreement on both rather than just the Craig amendment.
  Mr. BUMPERS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent there be 30 
minutes equally divided on the Craig amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I reserve the right to object.
  Mr. KERRY addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I would like to know whether we cannot 
deal with the entire issue now. After the disposition of the Craig 
amendment, I ask the Senator from Arkansas, does there need to be 
further time?
  Mr. BUMPERS. I have no further amendments. As I understand it, Mr. 
President, the parliamentary situation is that my amendment is pending; 
is that not correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment of the Senator from Idaho is 
pending.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Let me rephrase it. The second degree amendment of the 
Senator from Idaho to my amendment is pending.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Once his amendment is disposed of, then my amendment 
will be pending; is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. REID addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. I direct the question to the manager of the bill.
  Will the manager of the bill then explain to the membership of the 
Senate what the parliamentary procedure would be if in fact the Craig 
amendment is adopted?
  Mr. GORTON. The manager of the bill is not certain he can provide 
that explanation and will ask the Chair to correct him.
  As the manager understands it, if the Craig amendment is passed, the 
Bumpers amendment is then identical to the Craig amendment, and one 
would presume that that would be able to pass by a voice vote. But then 
in order to have the Craig language be the language of the bill, I ask 
the Chair, I believe the Craig amendment would then have to be further 
changed or turned into a different form in order to be the judgment of 
the Senate with respect to mining patents? May I make that 
parliamentary inquiry of the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If the Senate wants to go to conference on the 
Craig amendment, a subsequent amendment would have to be offered 
because the Craig amendment would fall with a motion to strike.
  Mr. GORTON. But the subsequent amendment would be identical to the 
present Craig amendment in its language?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. GORTON. It is the hope of the manager of the bill that a single 
vote 

[[Page S 11874]]
on the Craig amendment will settle this issue and that by voice votes 
we could, if it were to succeed, move to have it as a part of the bill. 
So under those circumstances, I would hope that the unanimous consent 
request for 30 minutes equally divided on the Craig amendment will 
settle this issue.
  Mr. BUMPERS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, I am agreeable to that, and I think that 
is almost automatic anyway, because if the Craig amendment prevails, 
then that becomes my amendment and so we could voice vote it.
  I wonder if the Senator from Nevada is now willing to enter into a 
time agreement on the Craig amendment.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I would be willing to enter into an 
agreement on the Craig amendment. I have been here all evening 
listening to the remarks of the Senator from Arkansas and the Senator 
from Alaska.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Why on Earth did the Senator vote no if he listened?
  Mr. REID. I would ask, of the 15 minutes, I be allotted 5 minutes.
  Mr. GORTON. There has been an objection, so I will ask unanimous 
consent that there be 30 minutes equally divided on the Craig 
amendment, with 5 minutes of the proponents' time to be allocated the 
Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid].
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and 
it is so ordered.
  Who yields time?
  Mr. REID addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. I would ask that the Senator from Idaho yield the Senator 
from Nevada 5 minutes.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I yield the Senator from Nevada 5 minutes 
of our time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, first of all, let us talk about patents. We 
have argued this issue before time and time again.
  This matter has been debated numerous times. For example, in 1992, I, 
along with Senators Domenici, Bryan, and DeConcini, offered an 
amendment which passed this body that would have established fair 
market value on this land that is seeking to be patented; a 
reversionary clause, meaning that if it was used for some purpose other 
than mining, it would revert back to the Government; there was also a 
reclamation clause in the bill that passed the Senate, and a holding 
fee that passed the Senate.
  We have tried to work this out on numerous occasions. This was killed 
in conference because they wanted to keep the issue.
  Mr. President, let me also make sure this body understands that 
patenting is hard to obtain. It is not easy to get to the point where 
you obtain a patent. The $2.50 is blown out of proportion, and that is 
a gross understatement.
  For example, a mining company in Nevada just announced that it was 
giving up the land it had patented after having spent $33 million in 
attempting to arrive at a point where they could obtain that patent--
$33 million.
  Sometimes, Mr. President, these explorations are successful. Near the 
town where I was raised, Searchlight, NV, Viceroy Gold, after 8 years, 
was able to start a patent mining operation. To arrive at that point, 
where they could take the first shovel full of dirt out of the ground, 
cost them $80 million. I repeat, $80 million.
  This, Mr. President, is why the Senator from Arkansas is wrong in 
saying that patents are giveaways. If you are talking about finding out 
how much money is under the ground in the way of minerals, you would 
have to be some kind of a genius--which does not exist in the world. No 
one knows what is under the ground, as exemplified by the company in 
Nevada which just last week gave up after having spent $33 million. And 
the company near the town of Searchlight, NV, which, before they could 
take a single shovel full of dirt out of the ground in their operation, 
spent $80 million.
  Mr. President, we need to keep the mining operations going throughout 
the country. It is one of the few industries that has a favorable 
balance of trade. We now have a favorable balance of trade in gold. But 
what we are doing here is we are driving them offshore like we are 
driving many companies offshore because they are afraid of the efforts 
of people like Senator Bumpers and others that they are not going to be 
able to do business in the United States.
  This amendment of Senator Craig is fair; it is reasonable, and it 
also establishes that the patents now in the pipeline will have to be 
processed.
  Secretary Babbitt has purposely refused to go forward with the work 
on these patents. He has one person in Nevada working part time issuing 
these patents. Therefore, none of them are issued. Judges throughout 
the United States have said it is shameful what Secretary Babbitt is 
doing with these patents. It is shameful. That is the word from a 
Federal judge.
  We need to move forward with this amendment. No. 1, it would process 
the patents that are in the chain. It would also establish a fair 
method on the patents that are issued. There would be a reversionary 
clause, and you would pay fair market value.
  The Members of this Senate should vote to support a viable, strong 
mining industry to make sure it stays that way.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. CRAIG addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, my second-degree amendment sets forth a 
variety of solutions to a problem that has plagued this Senate and this 
Congress for several years as we have debated changing the 1872 mining 
law.
  If we have heard it once, we have heard it many times from the 
Senator from Arkansas saying, ``Isn't it a crime that we are giving 
Federal land away for $2.50 an acre under this old law?''
  Mr. President, I think we all recognize that there was, on the 
surface of that issue and that argument, a problem. That was a fair 
market value for the surface of the land in 1872. It is not today. My 
second-degree amendment is very clear. It says that that $2.50 an acre 
now changes to a charge of fair market value.
  And what is that? That is a value established by the Federal agency 
in charge, the BLM in this instance, by a general appraisal method that 
they now use to establish land values. According to a recent study 
conducted by the University of Nevada Natural Resource Industry 
Institute, a fair market value in Nevada would range--we are talking 
surface value now--anywhere from $100 to $250 an acre, instead of the 
$2.50 an acre.
  The fair market value for the surface estate is not a solution to the 
total problem of reform that all of us have tried to achieve over the 
course of the last good number of years. But I would like to suggest to 
the Senators this evening, and encourage their support for this second 
degree, that it is a major step forward, that we are beginning to solve 
the problem of the 1872 mining law by offering this.
  Now, those who would argue that we ought not allow Federal land to 
continue to be owned in private ownership, we have provided a reverter 
clause in here that says when that property is used up, when it is no 
longer being mined, when there is no longer a mining value or a mining 
practice going on, that land reverts back to the Government. That is a 
strange idea. We are giving title. We are making the private individual 
pay for the title. But we are doing that only for the purpose of 
mining. No more of the arguments of condominiums and no more the 
arguments over development outside of the intent of the public policy 
to mine.
  So, we have addressed that. And we have said that land would revert 
back. And that is, I think, a great achievement if this Senate can pass 
that through to the conference and cause the Congress to deal with that 
important issue.
  And then in the end we assist the Secretary, as the Senator from 
Nevada spoke, in resolving his problems by giving him the extra 
resources to solve the patenting stalemate that he has currently got 
going on in the Department of the Interior. The Secretary today at 
breakfast agreed that first-part patents were a property right, and he 
had to proceed. But he was handicapped by no staff or the inability to 

[[Page S 11875]]
deal with that issue. And the third portion of this amendment would 
offer him that opportunity.
  With that, I reserve the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. BUMPERS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
  Mr. BUMPERS. With the utmost respect to my friend--he is my friend; 
we have an excellent relationship on and off the floor--but, honestly, 
I do not know how anybody could make a statement about fair market 
value, this kind of fair market value, and keep a straight face.
  You know what we are talking about here? We are talking about fair 
market value of the surface. We are talking about fair market value of 
that 1,850 acres that Barrick paid about $9,000 for. Barrick paid 
$9,000 for 1,850 acres. That was $5 an acre, I guess. And the Senator 
from Idaho says he wants them to pay fair market value. Fair market 
value in that case would have been probably somewhere between $100,000 
and $200,000. Big deal. There is still 11 billion dollars' worth of 
gold under the 1,850 acres.
  A Senator came up to me a while ago and said, ``How about this Craig 
amendment? He says they ought to pay fair market value.'' The only scam 
I can think of that is worse than what has been going on is to try to 
make the Senators believe that they are paying fair market value. If 
they were paying fair market value, they would be paying about $2 
billion, not $100,000--$100 an acre. Most of it is probably worth $100 
an acre, $200 at the most.
  You know what the western land looks like when you have grazing? They 
tell you it is not worth anything. But now they say, fair market value, 
and never bother to tell you that is just the surface. They are not 
talking about the 11 billion dollars' worth of gold underneath that 
surface. That is free. You do not pay for that.
  Then they say, ``We have got a reverter clause in this amendment. We 
will give you the mine back when we are finished with it.'' Please, for 
Pete's sakes. You have already given us 59 Superfund sites back, as 
well as thousands of other mines that are not on the Superfund list. Do 
not, for Pete's sake, give us any more. We are liable for up to $40 
billion to clean up the ones we have got. And the Senator from Idaho 
said, ``We are going to give them all back to you when we get through 
with them.'' Please, do not give them back to us. We cannot afford any 
more gifts like that.
  Unhappily, there are very few people in this body that know the 
issue. I do not know that we would do much better if they all knew it. 
We all know what is going on here. There are people who are voting 
against this moratorium because they have a mining industry in their 
State. I can almost understand that. But there are a lot of Senators 
over there who do not have any mines in their State.
  I cannot understand it. The National Taxpayers Union, the Citizens 
Against Government Waste--they all say this is the biggest scam going 
on in America. They are all opposed to continuing this outrageous 
giveaway of the public domain.
  The mining industry argues that we are going to put somebody out of 
work. Really? Why is it that Montana can charge at least 5 percent of 
the fair market value for raw metallic minerals on State lands, but if 
we tried to charge 1 percent on Federal lands, they are all going to 
shut down and put everybody out of work?
  How is it that Arizona can charge 2 percent of gross value on State 
lands, but if you charge them 0.5 percent on Federal lands, they are 
going to shut down and put everybody out of work?
  How is it that Utah can charge 4 percent of gross value on 
nonfissionable metalliferous minerals on Utah State lands and a 2.6 
percent taxable value severance tax, but if you charge 1 percent for 
mining on Federal lands, they are going to shut down and put everybody 
out of work?
  Wyoming, 5 percent of gross sales value on gold, silver and trona on 
State lands, plus a 2 percent of the minemouth value severance tax. If 
you charge them one red cent on Federal lands, they are going to take 
their marbles and go home.
  Oh, my, such cynicism, such hypocrisy while the American taxpayers 
plead for relief. We do not mind cutting Medicare $270 billion to 
provide a tax cut. But 16 of the biggest 25 mining companies in America 
are even foreign owned. I would like to go to England and start putting 
claims down on British-owned land and say, ``I think I will mine all 
the minerals off this land.'' You would be in the slammer in about 3 
minutes.
  But here, simply because they have the political clout--everybody 
knows precisely what this debate is about. And I do not mind people 
voting up or down and just saying, ``I don't care. I'm not going to 
vote to stop it.'' But for Pete's sakes, do not put this sham out there 
about fair market value.
  There is a lot of natural gas production in my State. Do you think 
that they get a break when they mine on Federal, State, or private 
land? Of course not. They pay royalties to the landowner.
  Look at this chart one more time: Coal, natural gas, oil, they all 
pay 12.5 percent, except for underground coal, which is 8 percent. The 
mining companies, because they have the clout and control over Senators 
where they have operations, continue to pay nothing.
  For 7 long, agonizing years, I have listened to that argument about 
how we are going to work this out, we need mining law reform, but if 
you adopt the Bumpers amendment, it is just going to thwart our 
efforts. I looked at a colleague letter that went out to every Senator 
here, saying, ``Senator Bumpers is going to offer that old amendment 
again and you are going to oppose it. If you adopt that old terrible 
Bumpers amendment, we will never get mining law reform.''
  I have heard that argument for 7 long, agonizing years. And we will 
hear it again next year and the next year and the next year and the 
next year--anything to put it off. They will also continue to use 
ploys, such as charging for the fair market value for the surface, to 
avoid the issue. Anything to give these guys something to hang their 
hat on and go home and say to the unsophisticated voter: ``Yes, I voted 
to make them pay fair market value.'' You will never hear anything 
about just for the surface, which is worthless.
  Few understand the issue, one of the reasons why Congress has such a 
high approval rating in this country. There are a few people who know 
what is going on. There are a few people who will know that we are 
cutting programs for the most vulnerable, helpless people in America 
and providing corporate welfare for the biggest corporations in 
America.
  Now, if those are the kind of values you want to go home and tell 
your folks about, be my guest. We know the die is cast. Three Senators 
who voted with me in the past did not vote with me tonight or we would 
have won. I do not know why they changed.
  All I know is, I did not lose. It is nothing personal to me. The 
people of this country lost a lot. I yield the floor.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I yield 3 minutes to the Senator from 
Nevada.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ashcroft). The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. BRYAN. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from 
Idaho.
  I am proud to endorse the amendment offered by my friend and 
colleague, the distinguished senior Senator from Idaho. The issue of 
mining law has been before us each and every year since I have come to 
the U.S. Senate, and each and every year, the industry is subject to 
the usual criticism: You are not for changing the mining law of 1872. 
This is an act of Congress that was enacted at the time that Ulysses S. 
Grant was President, and you all just simply do not want to change.
  Mr. President, for my colleagues who are listening, there are four 
issues involved in mining law reform: Fair market value for the surface 
estate, a reasonable royalty, reclamation provisions, and a provision 
that the land shall revert back to the Federal Government if it is no 
longer used for mineral exploration and development purposes.
  We agree with those changes. In the last session of the Congress, the 
Senate passed out such a bill authored by the senior Senator from Idaho 
and which I was proud to cosponsor.
  What is at issue in this debate is jobs, good jobs for us in Nevada 
which 

[[Page S 11876]]
produces more gold than all of the other States combined. It is 12,000 
jobs. The average salary is $43,000 a year.
  What is at issue for America is the loss of an industry that last 
year recorded a 13-percent decline in mineral development and 
exploration and, correspondingly, so many of these companies are now 
moving to Latin America where mineral exploration has more than doubled 
in the past year.
  So what we are seeking is reason and fairness.
  Mr. President, I say to my colleagues, there are some whose unstated 
agenda is to prevent mineral development and exploration on the public 
lands, and it is with that unreasonable element we have been unable to 
reach an accord, even though we share a common agreement that fair 
market value, a reasonable royalty, reclamation and reversionary 
provisions ought to be part of the fundamental changes to the mining 
law of 1872.
  Mr. President, I yield the remainder of my time to the floor manager 
of this issue, the distinguished Senator from Idaho.
  Mr. CRAIG addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
  Mr. CRAIG. How much time do I have remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 4 minutes and 54 seconds left.
  Mr. CRAIG. I yield 4 minutes to the Senator from Alaska, the chairman 
of the committee.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator in Alaska.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Craig 
amendment and in opposition to the Bumpers amendment. The Senate has 
rejected similar amendments in the past.
  The amendment that we are offering, which I am proud to cosponsor, 
would require, make no mistake about it, patent applications to pay 
fair market value for the surface estate. It is not a giveaway. It 
requires patented land to revert back to the Federal Government if the 
land is used for anything but good-faith mining purposes. The balance 
is there; direct the Secretary of the Interior to clear all pending 
patent applications at the Department of the Interior within 2 years of 
enactment of the bill and restore the third-party mineral examination 
program at the Department of Interior so that the Secretary can process 
the pending backlog of patent applications within 2 years.
  Mr. President, make no mistake about it, patents are almost 
impossible to get. On June 14, 1993, the BLM director, with Babbitt's 
approval, issued a BLM instruction memorandum which established an 
extremely convoluted procedure for processing patents. For example, the 
application must be reviewed by the local BLM staff, the BLM State 
director, the regional solicitor, the DOI solicitor, the BLM director, 
the Assistant Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of the Interior 
and, after that process, the application must then go back to the BLM 
director and, finally, back to the State BLM director.
  A mineral examination is then conducted by a mineral examiner who 
prepares a mineral report.
  Is this what the administration calls streamlining the Federal 
bureaucracy?
  Our amendment will end Mr. Babbitt's de facto moratorium by requiring 
the Secretary to move forward with processing pending patent 
applications.
  In short, Mr. President, I believe we need to enact comprehensive 
reform. Unfortunately, Senator Bumpers is forcing us to offer a 
solution to the patent issue on the Interior appropriations bill. We 
all know that is not where it belongs. It should be in the Energy 
Committee.
  Currently, my committee is considering three--three--mining law 
reform bills: The one introduced by Senator Bumpers, one introduced by 
Senators Craig and Reid and myself and S. 639, introduced by Senator 
Johnston.
  The majority and minority have been negotiating on this issue in good 
faith, and I am hopeful that during the coming weeks we can reach an 
acceptable compromise that I can bring before this body; that we can 
debate fully on this floor where it belongs. Until then, as a result of 
Mr. Bumpers' amendment, I believe the proper solution to the patent 
issue is to require miners to pay fair market value--fair market 
value--for the surface estates of future patented land.
  Our amendment will achieve this goal, and I respectfully urge my 
colleagues to support the Craig amendment.
  I yield the remainder of my time back to the floor manager, Senator 
Craig, and I thank the Chair.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, does the Senator from Arkansas wish to 
complete his argument? Does he wish to yield back his time?
  Mr. BUMPERS. I did not hear the Senator from Idaho.
  Mr. CRAIG. I would offer the Senator from Arkansas the opportunity to 
complete his time before I close.
  Mr. BUMPERS. How much time do I have remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 4 minutes 48 seconds 
remaining.
  Mr. BUMPERS. I yield back 4 minutes of that.
  Mr. CRAIG. If the Senator would wish to complete his statement, I 
will close out the debate on my second degree. Go ahead. You have 
yielded all time back?
  Mr. BUMPERS. You first. I yielded all but 48 seconds.
  Mr. CRAIG. Do you wish to use your 48 seconds at this time?
  Mr. BUMPERS. No.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this time be charged 
equally to both sides.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is the regular order.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I had hoped the Senator from Arkansas, 
because this is my amendment, would allow me the respect of allowing me 
to close debate. But I will go ahead and close out the remainder of the 
time that I have left.
  It is interesting that the Senator from Arkansas would choose to 
argue royalties. Royalties are not an issue before this Senate at this 
moment. We have used the authorizing committee to attempt to resolve 
that issue so that the Government could receive some return on the 
value of the subsurface asset, and we are still working on that. But 
what this amendment does--separate from that as a step and a process 
along the way--is that it asks those who are asking for a patent 
through the process of mining law to pay fair market value for the 
land--not $2.50 an acre, but whatever the appraisal process goes 
forward as. Once that is established, once the mine completed its work, 
the property reverts back to the Government.
  This is not a total answer to the problem of reform of the 1872 
mining law, but it is a step down the path toward arriving at that 
solution. I hope my colleagues will support us in this second-degree.
  I yield the remainder of my time.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, if what the Senator from Idaho just said 
were true, I would be voting with him. He said the ``fair market 
value.'' He did not say the fair market value of a surface. There are 
several billion dollars difference between what he is offering and what 
the taxpayers of this country have a right to expect.
  His amendment says fair market value of the surface. Well, on $50 
billion of the gold, $30 billion, or whatever it is underneath the 
land, you do not get that at fair market value. You get that free. That 
comes free. His amendment gives you the surface, which is worth about 
$100 an acre, and with it comes the largess of anywhere from $15 
billion to $30 billion from Uncle Sam and the taxpayers of America.
  Do not be diluted by that fair market value language.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, I move to table the amendment of the 
Senator from Idaho and ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to 
table the Craig amendment.
  The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Senator from Florida [Mr. Mack] is 
necessarily absent.

[[Page S 11877]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 46, nays 53, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 373 Leg.]

                                YEAS--46

     Akaka
     Biden
     Boxer
     Bradley
     Breaux
     Bumpers
     Byrd
     Coats
     Cohen
     Conrad
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Exon
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Glenn
     Graham
     Gregg
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Jeffords
     Johnston
     Kassebaum
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Mikulski
     Moseley-Braun
     Moynihan
     Murray
     Nunn
     Pell
     Pryor
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Sarbanes
     Simon
     Snowe
     Wellstone

                                NAYS--53

     Abraham
     Ashcroft
     Baucus
     Bennett
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Brown
     Bryan
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Cochran
     Coverdell
     Craig
     D'Amato
     Daschle
     Dole
     Domenici
     Faircloth
     Ford
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Hatfield
     Heflin
     Helms
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Kempthorne
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Packwood
     Pressler
     Reid
     Santorum
     Shelby
     Simpson
     Smith
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Mack
       
  So the motion to lay on the table the amendment (No. 2294) was 
rejected.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. CRAIG. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. REID addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.


              Amendment No. 2293, As Amended, As Modified

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Bumpers 
amendment as amended be modified so that it is a substitute for the 
language proposed to be stricken.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered.
  Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, reserving the right to object--I have no 
objection.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I urge adoption of the Bumpers amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will withhold.
  The yeas and nays have been ordered on the Craig amendment.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to vitiate the yeas and nays on the 
Craig amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. I thank the Chair.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 2294

  THE PRESIDING OFFICER. If there be no further debate, the question is 
on agreeing to the Craig amendment (No. 2294).
  The amendment (No. 2294) was agreed to.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. CRAIG. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. GORTON addressed the Chair.


          Vote on Amendment No. 2293, As Amended, As Modified

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question now occurs on the Bumpers 
amendment (No. 2293), as amended, as modified.
  If there be no further debate, the question is on agreeing to the 
amendment.
  The amendment (No. 2293), as amended, as modified, was agreed to.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. CRAIG. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                         Privilege Of The Floor

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Ted 
Milesnick, a Bureau of Land Management employee on detail to the 
Interior Subcommittee, be granted the privilege of the floor for the 
duration of the debate on the Interior appropriations bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee 
amendments be agreed to en bloc, with the exception of the amendment on 
page 95, lines 19 to 21; the amendment on page 9, line 23; the 
amendment on page 10, line 12; the amendment on page 16, line 4 through 
page 17, line 14; the amendment on page 21, line 24 through page 22, 
line 2; and the amendment on page 22, line 5 through page 23, line 19; 
and that the bill as thus amended be regarded for the purpose of 
amendment as original text, provided that no point of order shall have 
been considered to have been waived by agreeing to this request.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Reserving the right to object, I presume the amendment 
did not include the amendment relative to the National Endowment?
  Mr. GORTON. That is correct. The Senator's ability to amend the 
National Endowment will remain intact.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. And the museum?
  Mr. GORTON. Yes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 2295

  (Purpose: To delay implementation of the Administration's rangeland 
                            reform program)

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of Senator Thomas and Senators Campbell, Burns, Kempthorne, Bennett, 
Simpson, Murkowski, Craig, Dole, Pressler, Hatch, Brown, Kyl, and 
Baucus. I ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no objection, the pending 
committee amendment is set aside. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Washington [Mr. Gorton], for Mr. Thomas, 
     for himself, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Burns, Mr. Kempthorne, Mr. 
     Bennett, Mr. Simpson, Mr. Murkowski, Mr. Craig, Mr. Dole, Mr. 
     Pressler, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Brown, Mr. Kyl and Mr. Baucus, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 2295.

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:
       At the end of the bill, add the following:

     SEC.   . DELAY IN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ADMINISTRATION'S 
                   RANGELAND REFORM PROGRAM.

       None of the funds made available under this or any other 
     Act may be used to implement or enforce the final rule 
     published by the Secretary of the Interior on February 22, 
     1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 9894), making amendments to parts 4, 1780, 
     and 4100 of title 43, Code of Federal Regulations, to take 
     effect August 21, 1995, until December 21, 1995. None of the 
     funds made available under this or any other Act may be used 
     to publish proposed or enforce final regulations governing 
     the management of livestock grazing on lands administered by 
     the Forest Service until November 21, 1995.

  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. President, here we go again. On the 21st of this 
month our country's western agricultural way of life will face an 
assault unlike anything that it has faced before. On that date the 
Department of the Interior's rangeland reform regulations are scheduled 
to become the ``law of the land.''
  Originally, those regulations were to go into effect on February 21. 
However, at that time a 6-month moratorium on their effectiveness was 
granted. Then my good friends, Senators Pete Domenici and Larry Craig 
began working on balanced legislation both to codify existing 
regulations and to incorporate parts of Interior's ``Rangeland Reform'' 
regulations into a more workable plan.
  The sponsors have made a gallant effort to enact this legislation by 
the August deadline. However, the slow pace of Congress--we have such a 
heavy volume of legislation to consider this year--has prevented us 
from finishing this legislation in a timely manner.
  In short, Mr. President, Congress needs more time--90 more days at 
least--to do the people's work on this vitally important issue. At a 
meeting this morning, Secretary Babbitt told me and a number of my 
colleagues that, in effect, regardless of the fact that we are trying 
to work on definitive legislation that addresses this issue, he will 
not grant another moratorium. So, we have no alternative but to acquire 
additional time through legislation.
  During this debate we may hear the opponents of this pending 
legislation argue that additional time is not needed--that the 
Interior's regulations are 

[[Page S 11878]]
fair, and will adequately address all the problems so that we need 
worry about. All I suggest that any Senators who believe this should 
ask the majority of the people in my State--or virtually any other 
affected western State--who are familiar with these regulations whether 
they are fair. If you do, you will hear a resounding and unanimous 
``no.''
  If these regulations are indeed ``fair,'' then why has the Interior 
Department felt the need to embark on a mission to override public 
opinion, and to stall or even kill the Domenici legislation? As my fine 
colleague, Senator Thomas, has pointed out, this seems to surely skirt 
the edge of the statutory prohibition on lobbying with appropriated 
funds. Perhaps this desperation arises out of the knowledge that they 
will not be able to run roughshod over yet another aspect of American 
life. Or perhaps they are concerned that their subtle but fully 
deliberate plan to totally drive the western rancher and his or her 
livestock off of public range lands is threatened by the Domenici bill.
  Mr. President, I would urge my colleagues to give Congress a chance 
to at least debate this issue on a stage that is free from the outside 
pressures of an agency hell bent on the reckless enactment of unsound 
rules and regulations just to spite the Republican Congress. If, in the 
end, the legislation fails and the regulations go into effect, so be 
it. At least and we can then say that we have had a debate that was 
spirited, fair, and impartial and free from an agency attempting to 
further its own agenda.
  Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the Thomas 
amendment.
  Mr. KEMPTHORNE. Mr. President, I do not know if I am the only one 
here with a sense of deja vu, but I for one am frustrated to find 
myself here with my western colleagues, fighting yet again to maintain 
the western way of life.
  Two years ago we faced an amendment to the Interior Appropriations 
bill that would have raised grazing fees arbitrarily to a point that 
small ranchers would have been forced off the land. Today, we face 
regulations which will have that same effect. If unchecked, those 
regulations will go into effect in less than two weeks.
  The Senate voted two years ago to stop those regulations. I urge my 
colleagues to do so again. A moratorium will give Congress an 
additional 90 days in which to assert its right to set the guidelines 
of federal policy.
  Opponents will tell you that these regulations have had ample public 
input and participation. It is true that the Secretary has held 
hearings across the country in the time since he first made this 
proposal, and I commend him for dedicating so much effort and time.
  But do the final regulations reflect the input he received? I am 
concerned that there are a few key points on which these regulations do 
not. The public called for flexible management with a local focus. 
These regulations allow States to chose, but from among federally 
dictated management plans.
  The public called for clear and direct management processes, but 
instead the regulations propose a process weighted down with increased 
review and scrutiny. The final proposed regulations would have the 
effect of making the day to day operation on Federal land so cumbersome 
and costly that we might as well be talking about the arbitrary grazing 
fee from 2 years ago when you talk about the potential effects.
  I asked the Secretary of the Interior just this morning whether or 
not he wanted to see grazing on Federal lands 20 years from now * * * 
or whether he even thought that grazing belonged on Federal lands.
  He told me that he views grazing as an integral part of the biology 
of the range. The Secretary specifically pointed out that wild, open 
spaces evolved under the hand of wildfire and wildlife, roles which 
grazing now fills. But these regulations would stifle the individual 
initiative which gives the west its character, and smother the efforts 
of the stewards of those Federal lands. If we let our Federal lands 
become wastelands, not only will 27,000 ranching families, and hundreds 
of rural communities pay the price. We will all be the poorer. This 
must not happen.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, this amendment is on another issue which 
has from time to time been controversial with respect to grazing and 
grazing fees.
  The amendment is a simple 90-day moratorium on the regulations of the 
Secretary of the Interior, designed to permit the committees to come up 
with an authorizing bill.
  It has been agreed to and cleared on both sides.
  THE PRESIDING OFFICER. If there be no further debate, the question is 
on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 2295) was agreed to.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. DOMENICI. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I rise to express to my colleagues in the 
Senate my concerns about a provision in this legislation that pertains 
to funding of our national system of fish hatcheries.
  First, let me say that I am grateful for the actions of our 
distinguished Chairman, Senator Gorton, in the committee mark-up of 
this bill. The report calls for a moratorium on any possible closures 
of fish hatcheries until March of next year pending the report of a 
study group that will be convened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
for the purpose of making recommendations on the future of the hatchery 
program.
   Mr. President, recreational fishing is an incredible industry in our 
country, and in my home State of Arkansas in particular. The number of 
jobs created, the amount of State and Federal taxes collected from the 
sale of lures, boats, gasoline, hotel accommodations, food, etc., are 
enormous. It is absolutely perplexing to me that an agency of our 
Federal Government would ever propose to close hatcheries without an 
economic analysis of the impact, both to local economies and to the 
Federal treasury.
  It is troublesome to me that an agency of our Government would 
consider eliminating hatcheries that mitigate for damages to fishery 
resources that Federal water projects caused.
  This legislation contains a provision to either transfer ownership or 
close 11 Federal fish hatcheries. The Department of the Interior has 
intentions of closing additional hatcheries in fiscal year 1997. It is 
their intention of using the study group to define the criteria by 
which hatcheries would be chosen to be transferred or closed. I believe 
this premise is wrong.
  I understand and support our President when he attempts to reduce 
Federal spending by eliminating unnecessary and wasteful programs. 
Federal fish hatcheries are neither. It is a burden to try to 
understand that on the one hand we have Federal agencies, such as the 
Economic Development Agency and the Department of Commerce, whose roles 
involve the creation of jobs and strengthening our economy. On the 
other hand, we have the Fish and Wildlife Service, which can take 
actions which harm or destroy jobs under the guise of budget reduction 
and mission redefinition.
   Mr. President, I want my colleagues to know that I am going to stay 
involved in this issue. I do not accept the premise that some 
hatcheries have to be closed, that it is inevitable. If a hatchery is 
mitigating for damages to a fishery, if the tax revenues that result 
from economic activity generated by recreational fishing exceed the 
cost of operating and maintaining that hatchery, then I am going to 
take the attitude that the Federal Government has an interest in that 
hatchery. Our taxpayers paid for its construction and operation, and we 
should not be arbitrarily closing or giving it away. We have an 
obligation to those taxpayers.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, in conjunction with this bill, I note 
that the New England Holocaust Memorial Committee is building a 
memorial to the Holocaust adjacent to the Boston National Historical 
Park. The Memorial Committee will be entering an agreement with the 
Superintendent of the Park for maintenance of the Memorial and will be 
making a contribution to the Boston National Historical Park Donation 
Fund. This type of cooperation is contemplated by the Historic Sites 
Act of 1935. It is a good example of the Government working with 

[[Page S 11879]]
others on behalf of an important remembrance, and I welcome this 
opportunity to commend all those involved in this worthwhile project.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I have an amendment that I want to send 
to the desk. I am offering it in behalf of myself, Senator Inouye, 
Senator McCain, Senator Campbell, Senator Kyl, Senator Simon, Senator 
Dorgan, and Senator Conrad.
  Mr. SARBANES addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. SARBANES. Will the manager of the bill yield for a question?
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I will yield in just a moment.
  Mr. President, I understand that the amendment may hit the bill in 
more than one place. I ask unanimous consent that it nonetheless be in 
order.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SARBANES. I inquire of the manager of the bill what he foresees 
the work program as we proceed into the evening. It would be helpful to 
know.
  Mr. GORTON. That question could not possibly be more in order. I, in 
turn, was going to ask the sponsor of the amendment whether or not he 
and his cosponsors would agree to come to a time agreement on this 
amendment. The majority leader does want this amendment to be completed 
and disposed of, and it will require a rollcall vote before the evening 
is over.
  So if we can find out how long it will take to debate the amendment, 
we can answer the question of the Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, let me say to Senators who are 
interested in the timing that we have a number of Senators on our side. 
And essentially we have three principal sponsors--not just this 
Senator, but Senator Inouye, who used to be chairman of the Indian 
Affairs Committee, and Senator McCain, who is now chairman of the 
Indian Affairs Committee, and myself.
  We have talked about this, and we believe that we need 1 hour on this 
amendment.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I then state that I doubt that the 
opponents will take an hour, but for the purpose of the amendment, I 
ask unanimous consent that there be 2 hours equally divided.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I am not 
going to, of course, argue with the majority leader. He stated he wants 
to dispose of this matter. But I wonder if he would consider 
reconsidering that in view of the fact that we are looking at something 
around 11 o'clock before our vote on this amendment. I wonder if the 
manager can speak for the majority leader in this area where we might 
have a vote actually in the morning.
  Mr. DOMENICI. We will cut it down to 45 minutes, if that helps 
anyone.
  Mr. President, if we are going over to the morning, I want some time 
in the morning.
  Mr. GORTON. I do not believe we are going to go over to the morning. 
An hour and a half equally divided is appropriate. I would recommend 
it, and I gather the majority leader would agree that after we have 
disposed of this amendment, we may debate the next amendment, but we 
would not vote on that until the morning.
  Mr. PRYOR. Is there any disadvantage to just debating the amendment 
tonight and voting in the morning?
  Mr. GORTON. The disadvantage would be that no one would be here to 
hear the debate.
  Mr. PRYOR. I promise I will go home and watch it on the monitor, Mr. 
President. [Laughter.]


                           Amendment No. 2296

 (Purpose: To restore funding for programs within the Bureau of Indian 
                                Affairs)

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the Senator allow the clerk to report the 
amendment?
  Mr. DOMENICI. I think we should do that.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Domenici), for himself, 
     Mr. Inouye, Mr. McCain, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Simon, Mr. Dorgan, 
     Mr. Conrad, and Mr. Kyl, proposes an amendment numbered 2296.

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 2, line 11, strike ``$565,936,000'' and insert 
     ``$519,436,000''.
       On page 3, line 5, strike ``$565,936,000'' and insert 
     ``$519,436,000''.
       On page 9, line 23, strike ``$496,978,000'' and insert 
     ``$466,978,000''.
       On page 16, line 13, strike ``$145,965,000, of which 
     $145,915,000'' and insert ``$100,965,000, of which 
     $100,915,000''.
       On page 21, line 22, strike ``$577,503,000'' and insert 
     ``$531,003,000''.
       On page 24, line 23, strike ``$182,169,000'' and insert 
     ``$157,169,000''.
       On page 31, line 15, before ``, of'', insert the following: 
     ``(plus $200,000,000)''.
       On page 32, line 17, before ``: Provided,'' insert the 
     following: ``; and of which not to exceed $5,000,000 shall 
     remain available until expended for the implementation of the 
     Indian Tribal Justice Act (25 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.); and of 
     which not to exceed $2,500,000 shall remain available until 
     expended for the implementation of the Indian Child 
     Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act (25 U.S.C. 3201 
     et seq.)''.
       On page 43, line 1, strike ``$58,109,000'' and insert 
     ``$51,109,000''.

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, the majority leader is willing to accede 
to the evident desire of most of the Members, and I would state that 
under these circumstances, I guess we will ask for 1\1/2\ hours equally 
divided this evening on the amendment, and 30 minutes equally divided 
tomorrow morning before 9:30 and a vote to occur at 9:30 in the 
morning.
  Mr. PRYOR. Thank you. In behalf of many of my colleagues, we want to 
thank the distinguished majority leader.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Before you leave, I have not agreed to that yet. I just 
wanted everybody to understand this is a very important amendment. This 
has to do with the future of the Indian people in the United States and 
whether we are going to take care of them in an ordinary, reasonable 
way or whether we are going to give them an inordinate amount of budget 
cuts. So everybody knows, it is extremely important to many of us.
  I will not object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the request? Without 
objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GORTON. Let me, Mr. President, make my announcement in the form 
of a unanimous-consent agreement and add to that that no other 
amendments be in order.
  Mr. McCAIN. What is that request?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is the understanding of the Chair that 
there is a unanimous-consent request that there is 1\1/2\ hours of 
debate this evening equally divided between each side and that there 
will be 30 minutes of debate in the morning equally divided prior to 
the time of 9:30 a.m. and that no other amendments are in order during 
the pending of the amendment.
  Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I am authorized by the majority leader to 
say there will be no further votes this evening and the first vote 
tomorrow will be at 9:30 in the morning.
  Mr. DOMENICI addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, fellow Senators, I have been told more 
than one time as we move through a budget, as we move through 
appropriations, that we have a very important function as Senators, and 
that is to set priorities. When you are cutting budgets and restraining 
Government, it does not mean that you treat everything alike and that 
you say everything gets cut an equal amount. The purpose for our being 
here is to establish some kind of priority based upon either our 
commitments or what we think is most important.
  Mr. President, I happen to come from a State--it is not a large one 
in terms of population. But 10 percent of the people in the State of 
New Mexico are native American Indians. We have 18 of the small 
groupings called Pueblo Indians. We have 19 Pueblos, two Apaches, and 
one-third of the Navajo Nation. So we have 10 percent of our population 
that are and have been directly related to and to a great extent 
dependent upon the Federal Government.
  There are many who will say theyshould not be so dependent. But, Mr. 

[[Page S 11880]]

President, it is our law that says they are entitled to their tribal 
ways. We have treaties with them with reference to their ownership and 
what we are entrusted to do for them. And we have over a long period of 
time helped them with their government, the ordinary functions of 
Indian government. They do not levy any taxes. That is the way it has 
been for a long, long time.
  We have decided only one time in modern history to try to change this 
relationship, one of trust and treaties. We tried for a little tiny 
piece of history--2 years--to say we do not want to have this kind of 
treaty relationship. Let us go ahead and assimilate the Indian people. 
After 2 years, we decided we had made a mistake, and we went back to 
treaties and the trust relationship between the National Government and 
the Indian people.
  Now, I am not here saying that works perfectly well and that 
everything is great in Indian country. What I am suggesting is that my 
State is a perfect example of what is wrong with this bill that is 
before us. I will be the first to say Senator Slade Gorton, as chairman 
of this subcommittee, with Senator Byrd as the ranking member, has done 
an excellent job with the resources they have. But I think they make 
one glaring mistake. Frankly, there may be some who will say the budget 
did not give us enough money. Well, that may be the case, but we did 
not assume in the budget resolution which passed this Senate that we 
were going to cut Indian programs. We said they are of the highest 
priority, and we assumed they would be funded at the 1995 level for 
many reasons. This Senate voted for that.
  In my State, there are all those Indian governments that are entitled 
to a direct relationship as tribal governments to the U.S. Government. 
The State of New Mexico does not run the government in the Isleta 
Pueblo or Navajo country. The Indian people run it. We have a Bureau of 
Indian Affairs, and if ever we could find a way to make it more 
responsive, we ought to do that.
  What happened in this bill--and I know my distinguished friend and 
colleague, the chairman of the subcommittee, will talk about Indian 
programs being reduced by 8 percent, and that is treating them as well 
as any other programs within the Interior Department of the United 
States.
  The truth of the matter is that the only way you can get to that 8 
percent is if you put the Indian Health Service and other Indian 
programs that are not within the Department of Interior into that mix.
  Behind me is a chart, and it simply shows the Department of 
Interior--forget about Indian health which is another part of 
appropriations--which has the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife, Natural Resources Science Agency, National Park Service, and 
so on. Just look at that, and what it will tell you very plain and 
simple is that the Bureau of Indian Affairs is 26.6 percent of the 
Department of Interior.
  Mr. President, 26.6 percent of the Department of Interior is Indian 
affairs--27 percent. Now, just follow that line over a little bit and 
at what percent did they take of a cut in the Department of Interior? 
It is 45.6.
  Let me repeat that. That is plain and simple. This is a colored pie 
chart. It is the Department of Interior--not Indian health, the entire 
Department of Interior, and the white is 27 percent Bureau of Indian 
Affairs. However, when it comes to cutting the Department of Interior, 
in this chart, it has been cut 45.6 percent.
  Now, Mr. President, this part of Indian assistance and Indian 
programs that is being cut is all of Indian governance. It is how they 
govern their people on a daily basis. It is how they provide policemen 
and jails, how they provide juvenile courts, and all the things that an 
Indian government, like ours, should provide for its people.
  We just cannot say, well, let them go raise taxes or do something 
else. It just does not happen that way. They will not have any money 
for these things. That is not an 8-percent cut. In the Department of 
Interior the Bureau of Indian Affairs is getting cut 45.6 percent when 
they only make up 27 percent of the Department of Interior budget. That 
is not right.
  Now, there are only two ways to fix it. One is to say, well, let us 
have a lot more money for the Department of Interior, and then we will 
say ``and give some of that to the Indian people.''
  But that is not going to happen, and I am not here asking that it 
happen. There is not going to be more money dropped in from Heaven, nor 
will the Appropriations Committee find it and send it over to this 
subcommittee.
  So the only other thing we can do is say what are we going to put 
first. You prioritize. What are we going to put first? The Indian 
people and their daily lives and the ability to live a reasonably 
normal life with law enforcement, with some juvenile courts, with some 
of the things that you just have to have to stay alive. Or are we going 
to say to them you are just going to have to do without for the rest of 
this Department, made up of the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. 
Geological Survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Biological 
Service, Minerals Management Service, and the Office of the Secretary, 
to be funded. We must decide that we will put the Indian people on a 
higher priority than those Interior Department line agencies of the 
Federal Government.
  You choose, Senators. Do you want to fund Fish and Wildlife at what 
we would suggest, $30 million less out of a $511 million budget, or do 
you want to cut the Indian programs 45.6 percent? Which do you want? 
Which is fair?
  I submit what is fair is to put some money back into the Indian 
programs that I have described and take it out ofline agencies of the 
Federal Government, which I believe under any stretch of the 
imagination should be second position to a primary responsibility to 
the Indian people and the trusts that we have with them.
  So we have suggested plain and simple that we not put all the money 
back that was taken out because we cannot afford it. So we are 
suggesting that we put back $200 million and the budget authority that 
goes with that.
  These programs that I am referring to here have actually been cut 
$270 million. We are going to put $200 million back, and we are taking 
it out of the agencies that I have just described.
  We are going to hear that we just cannot do that to Fish and 
Wildlife; we cannot do that to the U.S. Geological Survey; and we are 
going to be told they have already been cut.
  Mr. President, they have not been cut the amount that the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs programs for our Indian people have been cut.
  So we are suggesting that when we are finished we take $46 million 
out of the Bureau of Land Management, leaving a total of $519 million; 
that we take $30 million out of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife, leaving 
$467 million; that we take $45 million out of the National Biological 
Service, leaving $100 million; Mineral Management Service, $55 million, 
leaving $157 million, and the Office of the Secretary, $7 million out 
of a total fund for his office, leaving $51 million.
  What do we choose? Do we choose to cut those departments, those parts 
of the Department of Interior, or do we say to the Indian people you 
take the cuts; you take a 45.6-percent cut in these programs that 
affect the daily lives of the poorest people in America.
  I am sure Senator McCain will offer us a glimpse of the kind of 
people we are talking about, their status in life, what they are up 
against, what they cannot afford, what they do not have. I believe the 
Senate, in its ultimate wisdom and fairness, will say we had better 
take care of the treaty relationships, the trust relationships that we 
have with the Indian people across this land and the Indian people in 
my State.
 The Indian programs represent 27 percent of total Department of 
Interior funding. If the committee bill is adopted, BIA will suffer 45 
percent of all of the Interior reductions in this bill. I do not think 
that is fair when many others are getting cut 8 percent, 9 percent, 7 
percent, and even a couple are not getting cut at all.

  I yield--how much time does Senator McCain want?
  Mr. McCAIN. Fifteen minutes.
  Mr. DOMENICI. I yield to Senator McCain 15 minutes, then Senator 
Inouye.
  Mr. McCAIN. I want to thank my friend from New Mexico for this 
amendment. It is a very important one. And I suggest to my colleagues 
that this amendment has more impact than any that I know of that we 
will address 

[[Page S 11881]]

this year or perhaps for years to come. Because if the Domenici 
amendment is rejected, it will reflect the words of the great Indian 
legal scholar, Felix S. Cohen, who wrote in 1953:

       Like the miner's canary, the Indian marks the shift from 
     fresh air to poison gas in our political atmosphere; and our 
     treatment of Indians, even more than our treatment of other 
     minorities, reflects the rise and fall in our democratic 
     faith.

  I suggest to you, Mr. President, that if we reject the Domenici 
amendment, it will reflect a fall in our democratic faith and an 
abrogation of our obligations, solemnly undertaken and solemnly 
violated throughout the history of this country.
  Mr. President, Senator Domenici covered, I think, the appropriations 
situation. I have been doing a little research on our relations with 
the Indians. And I would like to quote from the Congressional Record of 
February 14, 1854, the remarks of Mr. Sam Houston, who represented the 
State of Texas. He talks about a visit of Cherokee Indians to our 
Nation's Capital. He says:

       They presented themselves in Washington city under the 
     auspices of the superintendent, and I was directed by the 
     President of the United States, or by the Secretary of War, 
     to attend at the Executive mansion upon a certain day--in 
     1818--I think, in March.
       Upon the Indians presenting themselves to the President of 
     the United States, he made a few remarks to them; told them 
     he was desirous to hear what they had to say to him; that 
     they had come a great distance to see their Great Father; 
     that he had understood from the agent they had important 
     communications to make and favors to ask, and that he was 
     prepared to hear them with the greatest consideration. They 
     represented in detail pretty much what I have given as the 
     history of their tribes, and the circumstances under which 
     they had become located in the far West. The President, after 
     hearing all they had to say upon the subject, gave a reply, 
     in which he assured them of the constancy, friendship, and 
     protection of the Government of the United States; the 
     consideration to which they were entitled from the fact of 
     their having emigrated west of Arkansas at the suggestion of 
     the President, and assured them that it entitled them to the 
     most favorable consideration of this Government. He told 
     them, you are now in a country where you can be happy; no 
     white man shall ever again disturb you; the Arkansas will 
     protect your southern boundary when you get there. You will 
     be protected on either side; the white man shall never again 
     encroach upon you, and you will have a great outlet to the 
     West. As long as water flows, or glass grows upon the earth, 
     or the sun rises to show your pathway, or you kindle your 
     camp fires, so long shall you be protected by this 
     Government, and never again removed from your present 
     habitations.

  Mr. President, Sam Houston went on to say:

       I need not rehearse to gentlemen who are familiar with the 
     past, the tragedies that followed, the sanguinary murders and 
     massacres, the midnight conflagrations--these attest the 
     inharmonious action which arose from this faithless conduct 
     on the part of the Government or its agents. I know this may 
     appear a very harsh assertion to make here, that our 
     Government acts in bad faith with the Indians. I could ask 
     one question that would excite reflection and reminiscences 
     among gentlemen. When have they performed an honest act, or 
     redeemed in good faith a pledge made to the Indians? Let but 
     a single instance be shown, and I will be prepared to 
     retract. I am not making a charge against the Government of 
     the United States which is not applicable to all civilized 
     Governments in relation to their aboriginal inhabitants. It 
     is not with the intention to derogate from the purity of our 
     national character or from the integrity of our institutions 
     that I make the accusation; but it is because it is verified 
     by history.

  Mr. President, we made a treaty with the Apache in 1852.
  Article 10:

       Foreign consideration of the faithful performance over all 
     the stipulations herein contained by the said Apache Indians, 
     the government of the United States shall grant such Indians 
     the donations, presents and implement and adopt such other 
     liberal and human governors as said government may deem and 
     meet proper. Apache Indians shall not be held responsible for 
     the conduct of others and that the government of the United 
     States shall so legislate an act to secure the permanent 
     prosperity and happiness of said Indians.

  That was an 1852 treaty.
  Mr. President, there are lots of other treaties that I have read. So 
why do we not look for a minute at the condition of native Americans?
  The chart, please, on tuberculosis, diabetes and alcoholism. American 
Indian families live below the poverty line at rates nearly three times 
the national average. Nearly one of every three native Americans lives 
below the poverty line. One-half of all Indian children on reservations 
under the age of 6 are living in poverty.
  On average, Indian families earn less than two-thirds the incomes of 
non-Indian families. As these statistics indicate, poverty in Indian 
country is an everyday reality that pervades every aspect of Indian 
life. In this country we pride ourselves on our ability to provide 
homes for our loved ones. But in Indian country a good, safe home is a 
rare commodity.
  There are approximately 90,000 Indian families in Indian country who 
are homeless or underhoused. Nearly one in five Indian homes on the 
reservation are classified as severely overcrowded. One-third are 
overcrowded. One out of every five Indian homes lacks adequate plumbing 
facilities. Simple conveniences that the rest of us take for granted 
remain out of the grasp of many Indian families.
  Indians suffer from diabetes at 2\1/2\ times the national rate. 
Indian children suffer the awful effects of fetal alcohol syndrome at 
rates far exceeding the national average. Perhaps most shocking of all, 
Indian youth between the age of 5 and 14 years of age commit suicide at 
twice the national rate. The suicide rate for Indians between the ages 
of 15 and 24 is nearly three times the national rate.
  Mr. President, I cannot justify those numbers. I cannot account for a 
lot of it. I would like to look at just this chart here that shows the 
percent of related children under 6 with income below the poverty line 
in 1989. In the United States it is about 20 percent; at the Pine Ridge 
Oglala Reservation, 73 percent. At the Quileute Reservation in the 
State of Washington, it was 81 percent. At San Carlos Apache--they were 
the best off--they were 69 percent.
  Mr. President, these cuts are harsh. They are disproportionately 
deep, as the Senator from New Mexico has pointed out. Forty-seven 
percent of the cuts proposed are applied to Indian programs, Indian 
programs. Yet in fiscal year 1995, Indians account for 27 percent of 
the total Interior Department budget.
  Mr. President, I want to point out another aspect here. The Senator 
from New Mexico, my dear friend from Hawaii, and I have worked on these 
issues of native Americans for many years. It does not get a lot of 
attention. I have never seen a headline about an Indian issue unless it 
was the tragedy at Wounded Knee. I have never seen people write or call 
particularly about native American issues, although since Indian gaming 
has been on the rise, it certainly has gotten a lot of attention.
  But I have to say in all candor, Mr. President, I have not seen a lot 
of Americans who are concerned about the fact that 80 percent of the 
children at the Quileute Reservation are below the poverty line. And 
what the Senator from Hawaii, as chairman of the Indian Affairs 
Committee, and I and the Senator from New Mexico, the chairman of the 
Budget Committee, have tried to do, with help from others, is we have 
tried to emphasize that we believe the answer is Indian self-
determination and Indian self-governance. Ten cents out of every dollar 
from the Bureau of Indian Affairs actually ends up in the pocket of an 
Indian.
  Our entire effort literally has been to respect these treaties, these 
treaties that I just read that treat native Americans in a government-
to-government relationship and give the money to the tribes to dispose 
of as they see best for the members of these tribes.
  Where do the majority of these cuts come from? Exactly those 
programs. Exactly those programs that we have been trying to push all 
these years.
  Mr. President, I do not know what is going to happen to native 
Americans if we implement these cuts. I guess they will survive. I 
guess there will be the kind of situations that we have seen throughout 
the last 200-some years of our Nation's history. I guess there will be 
higher fetal alcohol syndrome rates, higher suicide rates, more 
homelessness. There are places on reservations in my State where Indian 
people already live in holes in the ground. I am not sure that those 
holes could be much worse.
  But I do know that over the last approximately 10 years, we have seen 
improvements in the Indian country. We 

[[Page S 11882]]

have seen it for a broad variety of reasons, including educated native 
Americans assuming positions in their government, including a better 
and perhaps more understanding treatment on the part of the Federal 
Government and the Congress.
  But if these cuts are enacted, I have no doubt--and I speak from 12 
years of dealing with native American issues--I have no doubt that 
conditions will rapidly become far more appalling and disgraceful than 
they are today.
  Felix Cohen, I think, said it far better than I could: The gauge of 
how we view our society is directly related to our treatment of native 
Americans.
  There is not a powerful lobby of native Americans in Washington. 
There is not a lot of impact of even the native American gaming tribes. 
People who come to Washington from time to time and visit Senator 
Inouye, me, Senator Domenici, they cannot understand why it is that, 
when their forefathers signed a solemn treaty with our Government, that 
we find it impossible to find it in us to provide them with what we 
promised them.
  Relations between the aboriginal tribes, as was stated by Sam 
Houston--although I would not use those words--but no doubt the 
relations between native Americans and non-Indians have been complex, 
and the reasons why some of the things have happened are not entirely 
the fault of the non-Indians.
  But I suggest to you, Mr. President, that somewhere in our zeal to 
cut the budget, to reduce this $5 trillion debt that we have laid on 
future generations of Americans, I think we have forgotten our 
obligations. Should there be reductions in Indian programs? Yes, should 
it be to the tune of 28 percent of their programs? I do not think so.
  I believe that what we do in our vote tomorrow around 9:30 will 
determine to a significant degree how history judges this Congress.
  Mr. President, I hope that we will look at this amendment in that 
fashion and that we will support the amendment of the Senator from New 
Mexico.
  I reserve the remainder of my time for the Senator from New Mexico.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Frist). Who yields time?
  Mr. DOMENICI. Senator Inouye wants 15 minutes.
  Mr. INOUYE. Yes.
  Mr. DOMENICI. I yield 15 minutes to Senator Inouye.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 18 minutes remaining. The 
Senator from Hawaii.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, 200 years ago when our Founding Fathers 
were engaged in the formation of this great Nation of ours, they gave 
much thought to the relationship of the new country and Indian Nations. 
And if one should read the debates of the Continental Congress and look 
at the Constitution, you will note that our Founding Fathers recognized 
the sovereignty of the Indian tribes and reserved for the Congress of 
the United States plenary authority over the conduct of relations with 
Indians.
  Sometime later, following the so-called Indian wars, this Nation of 
ours entered into treaties with Indian Nations. We, Members of the U.S. 
Senate, are responsible for ratification of these treaties. History 
shows that there were 800 treaties entered into between the Presidents 
of the United States, representing our country, and the heads of the 
Nations of Indians.
  Of the 800 treaties, Mr. President, history tells us that 430 were 
ignored by this body--they are still in the files--370 were ratified, 
and of those 370, every one was violated. We have a perfect score.
  These treaties, as my colleagues from New Mexico and Arizona have 
stated, were eloquent documents. They spoke of the sun rising in the 
east and setting in the west, and when the waters flow from the 
mountains to the rivers, for as long as this happens, this land is 
yours. And these treaties promised the Indians 550 million acres. The 
circumstances of history now cause the remainder of 15. What happened 
to the 500 million acres?
  But for these treaties, these Indians made a downpayment to our 
country. They paid for their health, education and their survival.
  One would think that after such treatment that they would hate this 
country. To the contrary, Mr. President. In 25 days, the people of this 
Nation will pause briefly to observe the end of World War II. On 
September 2, 50 years ago, the Japanese surrendered. I think we should 
recall that in all the wars of this century, on a per capita basis, 
more native American Indians put on the uniform of the United States 
Government than any other ethnic group. More of them stood forward and 
said, ``We are willing to shed our blood and give up our lives for the 
people of the United States.''
  So these people have paid their dues. The ceding to this Nation of 
their lands, this whole Nation, represents an unprecedented and still 
unequaled consideration for the obligations that this Government of 
ours assumed for the protection of lands and resources, provision of 
health care, education and the guarantee of permanent homelands.
  It is this prepayment in the form of lands which present-day value 
far exceeds the national debt and the commitments that were made in 
exchange for these lands that are so easily either forgotten or 
discounted in contemporary times when there are competing priorities 
for diminishing resources.
  But as my colleagues from New Mexico and Arizona have stated, ours is 
much more than a moral obligation, as the U.S. Supreme Court has 
repeatedly and consistently underscored over the years. Ours is no less 
than a legal obligation of the highest order,
 for their is no other group of American citizens for whom the United 
States has assumed a trust responsibility or legal relationship of this 
special nature. There is also no other group of Americans that have 
been forcibly removed from their aboriginal homelands and placed on 
reservations on some of the most desolate lands in the country. And 
there is probably no other group of Americans whose lives are more 
directly affected by the actions and inactions of our Government.

  We are not here to undo the history of misery and deception. But we 
are hoping that, by the action of this Senate, we will not compound 
this history. I just hope that my colleagues will join my distinguished 
friends from Arizona and New Mexico to, in some small manner, undo some 
of the wrongs that we have committed.
  Mr. President, my colleague from Arizona cited important statistics. 
The managers of this bill will undoubtedly tell the Senate that, 
overall, Indian programs were cut by only 8 percent. There are two 
major accounts. One is the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the other the 
Indian Health Service. In the Indian Health Service, for very good 
reason, they increase the amount not to the amount the administration 
recommended, which was much more, but nevertheless increased it, 
because the health statistics are such that even a Third World country 
would be embarrassed to repeat them.
  As a U.S. Senator, I stand before you, Mr. President, embarrassed to 
recite these numbers. The mortality rate from tuberculosis among 
Indians is 400 times the national average; the mortality rate from 
alcoholism is 332 times the national average; the diabetes-associated 
mortality rates among the Indians are 139 times the national average; 
the mortality rate from pneumonia and influenza is 44 times the 
national average; and as my friend from Arizona indicated, the 
mortality rate from suicide exceeded the national average by 28 
percent.
  I had the opportunity to visit Alaska on three occasions. On two of 
these occasions, I went beyond the Arctic circle. There was one village 
that I was not able to visit because I was told by the authorities that 
this village was quarantined because 92 percent of the citizens of that 
village had hepatitis. This is in the United States, Mr. President. I 
was also told that, in Alaska, for young men between the ages of 20 and 
23, the suicide rate was 14 times the national average.
  Something is wrong. We must do something to bring down these 
statistics. Quite recently, as chairman of the Indian Affairs 
Committee, I visited Indian land, and I was horrified to see the health 
conditions. In a clinic, I saw an x ray machine. I looked at the 
machine, and this was a World War II vintage x ray machine. I called 
upon the U.S. Army to look around their inventory to see if they had 
any spare ones and, yes, they had a few spare ones, so they took it to 
this clinic. But then they called me back and said, ``We cannot install 
this because the room there 

[[Page S 11883]]
is not appropriately guarded by lead walls.'' In this clinic, an x ray 
machine was operating next to the dental clinic with just a one-inch 
wall separating the two rooms. I am just wondering how many children 
who got dental treatment there are now suffering from x ray radiation.
  Mr. President, there are many more statistics, but I find it very 
difficult to go through them because it is painful. But I hope that in 
our vote we will try to undo some of this pain and misery. We owe the 
Indians. They paid for this.
  My final thought: Anthropologists tell us that at the time of the 
coming of Columbus, there were approximately 50 million Indians living 
in what we now call the 48 States. At the end of the Indian wars, just 
prior to the treaty period, there remained in the 48 States 
approximately 250,000. We nearly succeeded in wiping out the Indians. 
If we do not amend this measure, we may succeed.
  So, Mr. President, let us not compound the misery we have thrown upon 
the Indians. Let us, for once, do what is right and support this 
amendment.
  Thank you very much.
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, as a cosponsor of this amendment, which was 
offered by the Senator from New Mexico, Pete Domenici, I rise in strong 
support of the effort to restore funding to critical tribal government 
accounts.
  Mr. President, I want to refer for a moment to the Budget Committee's 
report on the budget resolution because I believe it goes directly to 
the heart of the issue at hand:

       The Committee recognizes the unique trust relationship 
     between the U.S. government and the nation's Indian tribes 
     and pueblos. That trust relationship is based upon a 
     government-to-government principle embodied in treaties and 
     subsequent actions by both the Executive and Legislative 
     Branches of Government, and the courts. The Committee 
     acknowledges this trust relationship, and assumes that 
     programs serving Native Americans through the Bureau of 
     Indian Affairs will be given priority consideration for 
     ongoing federal support.

  I want to emphasize a few points made by our Budget Committee, 
because we are not talking just about shifting priorities within an 
appropriations bill--although the Appropriations Committee has every 
right to do that. We are talking about something more fundamental: A 
trust relationship which finds its roots in treaties, and in actions 
taken by the President, the Congress, and the courts. It is a trust 
relationship that the Senate acknowledged when it passed the budget 
resolution back in May, and that did not go unnoticed among Indian 
people. Indian people looked to the budget resolution as an indication 
of Congress' commitment to their needs and concerns. We ought to affirm 
what we said just 3 months ago in the budget resolution and pass the 
Domenici amendment today.
  Mr. President, the reductions the committee has proposed affect one 
of the most vulnerable populations in the country. The committee bill 
would cut funding for basic governmental and social service programs on 
Indian reservations, including child abuse prevention and tribal court 
enhancement programs. These are programs that should be funded first, 
not cut first.
  The poverty rate on the Pascua Yaqui Reservation in Arizona is in 
excess of 62 percent. More than 33 percent are unemployed. The poverty 
rate on the Gila River Indian community is more than 64 percent. More 
than 30 percent are unemployed. On the Navajo Reservation, unemployment 
is more than 30 percent and 56 percent live in poverty. The figures are 
staggering and they go on and on.
  These are communities that need more help, not less. At the very 
least, funding for essential services should not be reduced.
  This amendment changes priorities; it does not add to the deficit or 
impede progress toward a balanced budget. The additional spending on 
Indian programs would be fully offset by cuts in our Interior 
Department accounts. All we are saying here is that Indian programs are 
of higher priority.
  Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support the Domenici 
amendment.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, how much time remains?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 6 minutes, 42 seconds.
  Mr. GORTON. And for the proponents of the bill?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 45 minutes.
  Mr. DOMENICI addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico is recognized.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I will take 1 minute. I would be remiss 
if I did not thank Senator Gorton and Senator Byrd for the Indian 
health portion of this bill because, essentially, there is no other 
health care for the Indian people if it is not Indian health. They have 
at least seen to it that the Indian Health Service is not being cut. I 
thank them personally for that. We have had very serious problems with 
this administration about Indian health.
  One final comment. If you look just at the Department of the 
Interior, not Indian health, just the Department of the Interior, you 
will find that the Indian programs therein were cut 45.6 percent, and 
that is the issue we are talking about. BIA represents 27 percent of 
the total funding within the Department of the Interior, but it was cut 
45.6 percent in this bill. Overall, Indian programs were not cut that 
much when you include the Indian Health Service and other Indian 
programs in this bill. We are not even restoring all of that funding in 
this amendment.
  I do not believe the Indian people are going to make it through the 
next winter and the next summer if they are cut this much in their 
daily programs for justice, juvenile homes, the day-to-day government 
that each of the tribes and pueblos have. For that reason, I am very 
worried, and that is why I brought the amendment to the Senate.
  I yield the floor at this point.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Washington wish to use 
his time in opposition?
  Mr. GORTON. Yes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I find much not only to commend but to 
agree with in the eloquent statements of my three colleagues from New 
Mexico, Arizona, and Hawaii. I most particularly want to agree with the 
opening statements of the Senator from New Mexico with respect to the 
fact that this bill, as is the case with every other bill, must set 
priorities, and that it would be entirely inappropriate simply to take 
every program funded in 1995 and reduce it by an identical percentage.
  This is particularly difficult in connection with the appropriations 
for the Department of the Interior, because more, perhaps, than most 
others, we, the Congress, are the sole source of moneys--or almost the 
sole source of moneys for many of the programs which are included 
within the Department.
  Because this Department, together with the Forest Service, owns and 
must manage for all practical purposes, all of the real property of the 
United States. We are not dealing with a responsibility that we can 
lightly brush off or abandon.
  However, I part company with my friend from New Mexico and my other 
opponents on this side when they paint the type of picture that they 
presented about reductions in the appropriations for the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs.
  The appropriations for that Bureau amount, Mr. President, to only 
one-third of all of the moneys devoted to Indian programs in this 
country. It is almost as if during the debate earlier today on welfare 
one of these Senators had said, ``You are reducing aid to those most 
needy in our society by cutting AFDC by a given percent,'' and ignoring 
Medicaid, other forms of health care, food stamps, and all of the other 
panoply of social programs.
  It is almost like saying if we cut the appropriations for the U.S. 
Army by one-third we would be reducing the defense budget by one-third. 
That simply, Mr. President, is not the picture.
  The Senator from New Mexico has pointed out that we did not only not 
reduce or cut the Indian Health Service, in fact, it is, I believe, the 
only program of significant size in this entire budget bill that has an 
increase as modest as it is, and that the education programs which fall 
within the jurisdiction of this committee are kept almost dead even.
  When we deal with the Indian programs that are within the 
jurisdiction 

[[Page S 11884]]
of this committee, the reduction is 8 percent from what was 
appropriated after the rescissions bill for Indian programs, a smaller 
reduction, Mr. President, than the overall loss in the bill, which is 
11 percent. With few exceptions, every other program in this bill 
already has a greater reduction than the Indian programs covered by 
this bill.
  Mr. President, even that does not approach the amount of money 
appropriated for Indian or for Native American affairs, because this 
bill itself accounts for only two-thirds of those moneys.
  If we look at the President's budget, because these other 
appropriations bills have not yet passed, the President's budget 
includes $356 million in the Department of Agriculture, $20 million in 
the Army Corps of Engineers, $5 million in the Department of Commerce, 
$470 million in the Department of Education, $214 million in the 
Department of Health and Human Services, $485 million in the Department 
of Housing and Urban Development, $4 million in the Department of 
Justice, $200 million in the Department of Transportation, and $85 
million in the Environmental Protection Agency, for a total of $1.842 
billion.
  Now, if you were to add that figure, even discounted to the total in 
the Department of Interior, we would end up with an overall reduction 
for Indian programs of approximately 5 percent.
  Mr. President, there are going to be few, if any, other proposals on 
the domestic side of this budget this year which are not hit harder 
than this one hits.
  Mr. President, we can deal with this question as a matter of internal 
priorities or I suppose we can deal with this question from a deeper 
philosophical level of the impact of all of these programs.
  The Senator from Arizona spoke of the goals of Indian policy as being 
self-determination and self-governance.
  Now, nothing in this bill undercuts the right of self-determination 
or of self-governance.
  The third phrase that the Senator from Arizona missed was 
independence--an ending of a dependency more than a century long on 
programs of this nature.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
  Mr. GORTON. I am happy to yield to the Senator.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Senator, I heard you say nothing in this bill in any 
way infringes upon Indian self-determination and governance; do you 
remember your exact words?
  Mr. GORTON. Yes.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Senator, would it not strike you if you take 27 percent 
of the money that is used to run the Indian governments day by day, 
that whether you have substantively or policywise changed the 
relationship or not you have made it so they cannot function?
  Mr. GORTON. My answer to that question is a very simple answer.
  The Senator from New Mexico as the chairman of the Budget Committee 
does not feel that by reducing the President's budget for all of the 
activities of the Federal Government by many billions of dollars, he 
reduces the ability of the American people to self-government or self-
determination.
  The ability of these tribes to govern themselves is not affected by 
the amount of money they are given by us.
  Continuing, the third self which the Senator from Arizona omitted and 
the Senator from New Mexico omitted, is self-sufficiency. Other local 
governments in the United States are primarily responsible for 
financing the activities in which they engage.
  As the Senator from New Mexico so eloquently said, Indian tribes do 
not levy taxes on their Members. This is not a function of poverty. 
They do not levy taxes on those who are doing well. These programs, the 
other programs which I have outlined, provide housing--not provided to 
most other Americans --provide health care without any contribution--
not provided to most other Americans. This entire panoply of 
activities. I know because I have heard these debates before, and a 
major goal of these policies is to create a degree of self-sufficiency.
  Yet, earlier in the debate over this bill when we asked that there be 
some kind of means testing for the distribution of money from the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs to tribes that would reflect the fact that 
some have incomes from natural resources and some have income from 
gambling, that proposition was anathema to those on the Committee on 
Indian Affairs. Because that was a substantive decision, we abandoned 
it.
  Mr. President, if there is one thing on which we all agree, it can 
certainly be the proposition that the policies so eloquently defended 
here by my three colleagues have clearly not even begun us on the road 
to self-sufficiency.
  It is strange how many different hats we can wear and not relate 
those subjects to one another. Until 4 o'clock this afternoon we were 
debating welfare reform. While there are profound differences among 
Members on both sides of the aisle, I think within the membership on 
each side of the aisle, one of the areas on which I heard no 
differences between the two parties even was the proposition that 
welfare should be temporary; that for many or most people there should 
not be more than 5 years, with certain exceptions during which 
individuals were entitled to welfare programs.
 And yet these programs, these programs are all forever. They are all 
forever. The psychology that people should be encouraged to engage in 
individual self-determination and self-sufficiency is absolutely 
absent.

  While it really is not an appropriate part of this debate, which is 
only on an appropriations bill and not on substance, it would seem to 
me that, as we are required to examine what a national welfare system 
has done to the people who are its supposed beneficiaries, it is long 
past time that we should examine whether or not a system of permanent 
dependency on the Federal Government--what kind of effect it has had on 
its so-called beneficiaries and whether or not many of these 
pathologies are not contributed to by the very programs that are being 
defended here.
  But, as I say, that is not necessarily appropriate for this debate. 
What is appropriate for this debate are really two factors. One, Indian 
programs taken as a whole have not only not been singled out for 
discriminatory treatment, they have been treated considerably more 
generously than other programs within this appropriations bill. And 
when we add to them appropriations which will inevitably come through 
other appropriations bills not dealt with so far, they will end up 
overall being fairly close to even.
  So, to concentrate on one line in this proposal, for one significant 
but not overwhelming part of the way in which this Government 
subsidizes Indian individuals and Indian tribes, is to be disingenuous 
if we are to look at the degree of support which is being provided to 
this group of citizens in the United States. It is, in comparison with 
the budget which has been provided for us by the Senator from New 
Mexico, extremely generous.
  Now, where does the money come from? This is a big amendment in this 
bill. This is $200 million to be placed back in the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs so that, overall, Indian activities within this bill are almost 
held even while everything else goes down very, very significantly.
  Mr. President, if we ended up with a bill that went to the President 
and was signed by the President with these reductions in it, what would 
happen to the responsibilities we have for the property that is held, 
effectively, in trust for all of the people of the United States, in 
our National Park System and our wildlife refuges, by our Bureau of 
Land Management?
  Mr. President, I do not have to guess as to that. These organizations 
have told us what will take place. I can simply read with respect to 
the Fish and Wildlife Service. Our bill includes $41 million less for 
the Fish and Wildlife Service than the President's requested level. 
This $30 million reduction, according to the Service itself, would shut 
down or dramatically scale back major operating programs that benefit 
all Americans.
  With a cut of this magnitude, Fish and Wildlife would have to close 
as many as 50 heavily visited national wildlife refuges: two in the 
State of Alaska, Kenai and Tetlin; one in Arizona, White River in 
Felsenthal, AR; Sacramento and San Francisco Bay, California; four in 
the State of Florida; Okefenokee in Georgia; Crab Orchard 

[[Page S 11885]]
in Illinois; Desoto on Walnut Creek in Iowa; Quivera and Kirwin in 
Kansas; Sabine and Cameron Prairie and Tensas, in Louisiana; Minnesota 
Valley in Minnesota; two in Mississippi; two in Missouri; two in 
Montana, two in Nevada; three in New Jersey; three in New Mexico, three 
in North Carolina; one in Oklahoma; three in Oregon; three in South 
Carolina; Hatchee in Tennessee; Mr. President, five in Texas; one in 
Utah, one in Virginia; four in Washington; one in Wyoming; and 
waterfowl production areas in five other upper Midwest States.
  Recreation programs at other refuges, including hunting, fishing and 
outdoor education, would be reduced or eliminated to preserve funds for 
habitat protection or improvement. Closure of 20 hatcheries would 
impact the Fish and Wildlife ability to restore populations of sport 
and commercial fisheries in both the Atlantic and Pacific Northwest.
  And so on. The total economic benefits generated from shipments of 
wildlife imported and exported from the United States are $800 million 
a year. The Bureau of Land Management has already been reduced by $50 
million from the President's proposal. This, according to BLM, would 
force it to shut down services to a wide array of public land users, 
including mineral extraction--on which we had a long debate and votes 
earlier this evening--livestock, timber, recreational users, hunters 
and fishermen.
  Mr. President, the list of closures of enterprises of the Geological 
Survey fall into the same category. There are more than a dozen such 
closures which would result. And in every case, these are 
responsibilities which are undertaken by the Federal Government on 
behalf of, not one group of Americans, but all Americans. And in the 
case of the two land management agencies, they are, in fact, areas in 
which we own and must manage the lands of the United States. And, very 
bluntly, they would be devastated by this amendment.
  In fact, I am certain, if this amendment were agreed to, the Senator 
from West Virginia and I would not be able, in a conference committee--
would not wish, in a conference committee--to keep these reductions. 
What we would have to do would be to spread them out over all of the 
other responsibilities through the National Park Service and the 
National Forest Service. Bluntly, it would include almost all of the 
construction and land acquisition projects which Members have asked and 
have received from the Senator from West Virginia and myself, most of 
which are not included in the House bill.
  Mr. President, we do have a very real responsibility. We have a 
responsibility for all of the agencies of the Department of the 
Interior, for the Forest Service, part responsibility for the 
Department of Energy, and for the cultural institutions of the United 
States. It has been neither an easy nor a pleasant task to determine 
where and how we can reduce those appropriations by $1.5 billion.
  I started my remarks this afternoon with the point that we have $1.5 
billion less to spend in the next year than we do in this year. About 
20 percent of that money, $300 million or so of that $1.5 billion, has 
been taken from Indian programs within this field of responsibility. 
That is a smaller share of what they are receiving this year than it is 
for the entire balance of this appropriations bill. This is not only 
not a discriminatory reduction, it is a less-than-average reduction.
  It is a less than average reduction in an area in which we have 
protected the most important functions of health care and of education, 
and not impacted the rights of Indian tribes to make decisions for 
themselves but in effect has said what is absolutely inevitable. Again 
I find it curious in the debate with my friend--perhaps my closest 
friend in the U.S. Senate, the Senator from New Mexico, who chairs the 
Budget Committee, on which the Presiding Officer and I serve--who has 
told us, and caused us to pass a budget resolution which will call for 
reducing expenditures in all of these areas, not just for one year but 
for 7, which will inevitably result in reductions like this, and many 
feel that somehow or another we can protect this field, and only this 
field, from such reduction and not ask for even a quite proportional 
contribution from Indian groups and a beginning of a movement on their 
part from the dependency to independence, to self-support for at least 
the governmental functions which they carry out themselves.
  This is a fair proposal, Mr. President, in its present form. It saves 
the most important Indian programs. It reflects the fact that Indian 
programs and other appropriations bills are likely to save even perhaps 
the increase. It reduces other elements in this bill by more than it 
does in Indian programs themselves. But it protects those functions 
from any cuts at all over which we have full 100 percent 
responsibility, such as the operations of the National Park Service and 
the cultural institutions of this city which are a part of the 
responsibility of this Congress. And those are the only areas other 
than Indian health which are not reduced in this bill.
  Mr. President, to adopt this amendment is to breach a trust. It is to 
breach the trust which we have imposed on the Government of the United 
States properly to manage its millions of acres of public domain for 
all of the people to provide recreational activities, to provide 
scientific research, to provide for the use of our natural resources. 
And these reductions in this bill will gut our natural science through 
the biological service; through the geological service; will gut our 
ability to manage our wildlife refuges and our land management lands, 
and will severely impact on the ability of the American people to enjoy 
those lands and to use them for recreational purposes.
  Mr. President, the amendment should be rejected.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield 10 minutes?
  Mr. GORTON. The Senator will yield whatever amount of time my 
colleague wishes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 19 minutes remaining in opposition.
  The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. BYRD. I thank my friend. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, I fully support the case that has been so ably 
expressed against the amendment by the distinguished Senator from 
Washington [Mr. Gorton]. I cannot improve upon it. As a matter of fact, 
I could not equal it.
  The amendment proposes to reduce over $200 million from various 
accounts in the Interior appropriations bill as reported by the Senate 
Appropriations Committee in order to put money into the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs.
  The effect of this amendment is to impose greater reductions on 
programs in the bill which have already been introduced in order to 
restore funding to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The intention of the 
amendment is to insulate the Bureau of Indian Affairs from the 
reductions necessitated by the budget resolution and the drive for a 
balanced budget.
  I appreciate the concerns of the sponsors of this amendment about the 
effects of this Interior bill on the BIA programs. However, I must 
remind all Senators that the Indian programs consumed about 30 percent 
of the total resources of the Interior bill.
  In the recommendations pending before the Senate today, the committee 
has protected the critical functions of education for Indian children, 
health care for Indian people, fulfillment of legislative payments due 
to settlement of land and water claims of Indian tribes, and protection 
of the core trust responsibilities for Native Americans.
  The reductions in Indian programs are directed at tribal government. 
Just as we are expecting the Federal Government to downsize and do more 
with less, so too must tribal governments. This is not to suggest that 
what the tribes use their funds for is not important. Rather, it is yet 
another example of what gets affected when discretionary spending is 
reduced. And we have not seen anything yet. Just wait until next year.
  As indicated when we began debate on this measure, this 
appropriations bill is funded $1.1 billion below the fiscal year 1995 
enacted level. I will repeat--$1.1 billion below last year.
  The only way to comply with the allocation assigned to this 
subcommittee was to engage in spending cuts. The subcommittee sought to 
be responsive to the variety of demands for the programs in this bill. 
There were well over 1,000 requests submitted by Senators for items to 
be funded in this bill. The 

[[Page S 11886]]
vast majority of these were for items in the natural resource accounts, 
particularly land acquisition and construction. It was not possible to 
protect any account fully and still advance many important projects 
brought to the subcommittee for consideration.
  Mr. President, the types of reductions imposed by this bill are the 
consequence of the bottom line of the budget resolution. While the 
assumptions of the budget resolution are not binding on the 
Appropriations Committee, the bottom line for discretionary spending is 
very binding--very binding--unless 60 Senators wish to waive the Budget 
Act and allow an appropriations bill to exceed its 602(b) allocation.
  In considering the allocation of the domestic discretionary spending 
category amongst the various appropriations subcommittees, the Interior 
subcommittee was fortunate in that the allocations from the full 
committee did not track the budget resolution dollar for dollar. Had 
that occurred the cuts in this bill would have been even greater. The 
budget resolution would have assigned an allocation to this 
subcommittee that would have been $443 million less than that currently 
in place for the Interior bill.
  Mr. President, the sponsors of the amendment may contend that the 
budget resolution would not have imposed these types of reductions in 
the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and that may be true. But let me describe 
for Senators just some of the things that the budget resolution would 
have done that this subcommittee chose to handle differently.
  The budget resolution assumptions rejected every single land 
acquisition project--not just for this year but for the outyears as 
well; not a reduced land acquisition program, but an outright 
termination of the program.
  In response to Senators, Senator Gorton and I chose to fund a limited 
yet responsible land acquisition program. In order to do this we had to 
take cuts in other areas.
  The budget resolution assumptions would have reduced energy programs 
in this bill in half, and this would mean even greater cuts than those 
recommended in areas such as grants for home energy weatherization for 
the low income and the elderly, energy efficiency improvements in 
buildings, natural gas research and development programs, including 
those for high-efficiency turbine systems and fuel cells, and 
development into alternative fuel systems for vehicles and other 
applications.
  The committee opted to put all of these programs on a declining path 
but to do so in an orderly fashion so that investments would not be 
wasted, investments today.
  For those who think that the bill has not done enough to stabilize 
the timber supply program and the natural forest system lands, the 
budget resolution would have imposed greater cuts on the Forest Service 
accounts than the 22 percent cut already taken in the committee's 
recommendation.
 The budget resolution assumptions would have imposed a reduction of 
$68 million on the National Biological Service, as compared to the $27 
million cut recommended by the committee. The committee's action, 
however, preserves ongoing operations at longstanding facilities in Ann 
Arbor, MI; La Crosse, WI; Jamestown, ND; Lafayette, LA; Gainesville, 
FL; Columbia, Missouri; Anchorage, AK; and, yes, Leetown, WV; and 
Seattle, WA. At the funding level for NBS in the House bill, all of 
these facilities would be affected by closure.

  So, Mr. President, the subcommittee opted to distribute the cuts 
mandated by the budget resolution in a different fashion. Had we 
exempted 30 percent of the bill from any consideration of spending 
cuts, the ramifications would have been even greater elsewhere.
  The committee recommendations include an 8 percent reduction in 
Indian program funding. By comparison, natural resource programs for 
the land managing agencies are reduced by 14 percent. The Department of 
Energy, which makes up a far smaller portion of the bill than the 
Indian programs, was reduced by 10 percent. The cultural programs that 
make up just 6 percent of the bill are reduced by 15 percent. Thus, the 
8 percent reduction for Indian programs is not disproportionate in the 
context of a declining budget.
  Senators should remember that the committee's recommendations protect 
Indian health care services, education, and trust responsibilities. 
This bill funds recently authorized negotiated settlements at a time 
when many other authorizations for other programs are unable to be 
funded. Reductions are imposed on the Indian programs just as they are 
imposed on nearly every program in this bill.
  Mr. President, I have listened to the words of my distinguished 
friends who are sponsors of this amendment. They make a good case. And 
I sympathize very much with what they have said. This is one of the 
disagreeable responsibilities that we have to fulfill in this body, 
opposing the Senators who are our friends, who make a good case for the 
cause which they are presenting.
  It is a situation that we are going to find more and more 
disagreeable as we go along by virtue of the fact to a considerable 
degree we are being asked to increase military funding by $7 billion 
over and above the President's request. But it is going to come out of 
the hide of domestic discretionary spending. There is no way to divide 
this child between those, on the one hand, who make a justifiable plea 
for this or that or the other cause and, on the other hand, be fair, 
intemperate and respond favorably to those on the other side in a given 
situation.
  I share 32 years with my friend, the Senator from Hawaii--32 years. 
Never have we had a disagreement, never have we had an angry or heated 
exchange on this floor or in any committee or subcommittee. I have many 
friends in this body on both sides of the aisle, and he is one of my 
very, very best and one whom I greatly admire. If there is a friend in 
this body of the American Indian--and there are many friends--the 
distinguished and able Senator from Hawaii [Mr. Inouye] is that true 
friend. So I find it very disagreeable to myself to have to oppose his 
position on this amendment.
  My friend, the Senator from New Mexico, is one of the brightest 
Senators in this body. His intellect I admire greatly. His 
effectiveness is unexcelled. He, too, is my friend, and I find it 
difficult to take a stand against the position he has proposed.
  The distinguished Senator from Arizona is a true patriot, and his 
demonstration of patriotism is repeated many times and it is 
unassailable. He is a dedicated Senator. He does his homework well, and 
I have great admiration for him. But in closing, I must say that we do 
have to make a choice. I think the distinguished manager of this bill 
has been fair. He has been reasonable. He has done the best that he 
could do with what he has with which to do. I support him fully in 
taking the position in opposition to the amendment, and I do so, as I 
say, apologetically to my dear friends who have made their case, but I 
think we can only do so much with what we have.
  The Senator from Washington has weighed the pros and cons in the 
balance, and when Senators consider what is in the bill and also what 
the committee has had with which to spread the funds among the various 
agencies--and there are 40 agencies involved in this bill--plus the 
fact that, as the distinguished Senator from Washington has said, when 
we add a little here for this amendment, we have to take a little away 
from somebody else, from some other Americans--I hope Senators will 
take a look at how their States will be affected if this amendment is 
adopted. I believe we will find that 12 States will gain in BIA funds 
while 38 States will lose to one degree or another. That is just the 
way we have to face up to this situation. And this is not the only time 
we are going to have to make this kind of choice. It is going to be 
thrust upon us repeatedly in the days ahead. We might as well kind of 
get used to it.
  So I salute my friends for doing what they think is right. Senator 
Gorton and I, I am sure, would like nothing better than to be able to 
accede to this request, but we also have a responsibility toward other 
programs, toward other Americans as well as the Native Americans, and 
we have tried to discharge that responsibility to the best of our 
ability.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. DOMENICI addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. DOMENICI. What is the time situation? 

[[Page S 11887]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico has 5 minutes and 
13 seconds. And the Senator from Washington has 3 minutes, 9 seconds.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Would Senator Inouye like half the time?
  Mr. President, we get 5 minutes each tomorrow. I am hopeful in this 
case that even though there are not so many Senators in the Chamber, 
that between this evening and tomorrow Senators will have had a chance 
to listen. I very much appreciate the arguments of those who are 
opposed to us and without using a lot of time, let me just suggest that 
they are both held in high esteem by this Senator.
  But, Mr. President, it is too bad that the Indian people of the 
United States do not reside in cities like Seattle, WA, Albuquerque, 
NM, Milwaukee, WI and others. They really live in tiny places like 
Taos, Zia, Mescalero, San Juan, and hundreds of little places.
  I say to Senators, if this is a case where you are going to look in 
your own back yard and say, ``If I'm going to lose a little bit of the 
fish and wildlife activities in my State, I am not going to help the 
Indian people.'' Or I regret to say, if the Senators choose to say, 
``The Indian people are only in 12 States, therefore, if we give them 
anymore money, 38 States lose something.''
  I know my friend did not mean that we ought to approach the Indian 
problems of America that way. I must say, however, that I cannot create 
demographics. All I do is represent the Indian people of my State and 
wherever they may be across the Nation. Native Americans just do not 
happen to be in every State.
  I submit we are not going to spend anymore time on this. From this 
list the Fish and Wildlife Service gave you, I only wrote down one 
note, Senator Gorton. Given that one long list of wildlife refuges that 
they are going to close, do they do anything else? What does the rest 
of the money go for? Maybe they ought to leave the refuges open and cut 
something else. We get this every time we talk to the Department of 
Interior. Last time we talked about parks we had park rangers having 
press conferences, talking about how many parks were going to be 
closed. They could not know how many parks were going to be closed 
until this bill passes. They do not know if any parks are going to 
close at all. It happens there are not going to be any because of the 
way the bill was handled. Two months ago the national monument syndrome 
had spread to every national park with Federal officials holding 
meetings, calling people. I do not know how many hundreds of these 
parks were going to be closed according to the administration.
  I admit, Mr. President, that when you take 46 percent out of the 
total Department of Interior reductions that will come out of local 
tribal programs, I cannot stand up here and tell you that it is a fish 
and wildlife refuge. I cannot even tell you that it is a fish hatchery. 
I can tell you that it is a small group of people and their local 
government. If somebody says here today, ``Well, government is getting 
cut everywhere.'' I do not know about that, but I can tell you in my 
State, the Indian Pueblos, and their government's money will get cut. 
Now for those who say America's narrowing down its government, making 
it smaller. Are we making it significantly smaller in one fell swoop? I 
cannot even tell you as eloquently as my friend, Senator Gorton did, 
what precisely will be affected.
  But let me tell you, the programs are the government operations of 
Indian tribes and Indian reservations across America, general 
assistance to individuals and families whose incomes are below current 
State standards, child welfare programs run by the tribes that provide 
assistance to abandoned or neglected children, programs to prevent the 
separation of families, again run by the tribes, law enforcement run by 
the tribes to have some law and civility in these villages where so 
much crime is coming and so much drunkenness, and, yes, even suicide 
going rampant across Indian country, fire protection for the Indian 
villages, maintenance of 20 million miles of roads, most of which are 
not even good enough to travel on.
  For each one of those governments across this land that is a pretty 
healthy cut.
  Now, somebody might say, ``Would you cut some other Indian program 
and pay for these?'' Well, let me suggest tonight the issue is, do we 
send this bill out of this Chamber significantly reducing the Indian 
government money, the local tribal programs or do we not? That is the 
issue.
  I submit we should not. And I submit--
  I ask that I have one additional minute, Mr. President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DOMENICI. I submit that if the line agencies of our Government 
have to be restrained in order to help the Indian people, who are in a 
state of crisis, so be it. I am ready to go home and say, ``Yes. We had 
to save Indian programs. Fish and Wildlife Service, you get less 
money.'' We had to say to the USGS, ``Yes. You get less money,'' and 
the others that I mentioned, the 6 agencies or so that we have to 
reduce.
  Now, if they go to conference and want to reduce everything in this 
budget rather than just those five or six agencies, that is up to the 
conferees. Then it is up to the Senate and the House if they want to 
vote for that later on. The issue now is very, very simple. Return $200 
million to the tribal programs to do what I have just described, and 
take it out of the line agencies of Federal Government that I have 
described here tonight. I, frankly, believe it is the right thing to 
do. What will come of it after that? We will just have to wait an see.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time is expired. The Senator from 
Washington has remaining 3 minutes, 9 seconds.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, the fact remains that Indian programs are 
reduced less by this budget than almost every other program within this 
appropriations bill. That is a fact. The fact is that one-third of all 
Indian programs are not even included in this bill and do include child 
care, violence prevention, and the like, and remained in bills yet 
undecided on this floor. The Senator from New Mexico asked but did not 
answer the question, are the programs which are reduced in this 
appropriations bill so important that restoration should come from 
other Indian programs?
  This Senator, at least, would defer to the authorizing committee, to 
those who represent large groups of Indians, in a reallocation of 
priorities within Indian programs. What this Senator feels to be 
totally unfair, however, is to devastate the other land management 
activities of the Government of the United States, land management 
activities which are dedicated to the benefit of all Americans, 
including of course, Indians, in the preservation of wildlife, the 
provision of recreation, the restoration of our fisheries and of our 
forests.
  These are programs that we cannot possibly abandon to anyone else. 
They are the sole function of the Government of the United States. 
Indians, who are self-governing, and at least partly self-sufficient, 
as inadequate as they may be, do have other sources. We discussed very 
briefly gaming activities which will be discussed more and more which 
have taken place only in the last handful of years. And yet no 
contributions, zero contributions is asked of the beneficiaries of 
those activities toward these vitally important questions.
  This is an appropriations bill dealing with extremely difficult 
questions and the requirement of overall cuts of 11 percent, which has 
reduced Indian programs by markedly less than that amount and has 
reduced other programs already by considerably more than that amount. 
It is neither fair, Mr. President, nor good policy, nor appropriate 
stewardship, nor a discharge of our trust for the lands we all own as 
citizens in common to make these reductions, none of which affects any 
of the myriad of other Indian programs, simply in order to preserve the 
full dependency of these Indian governmental activities on funding not 
of their members but of the Federal Government itself.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Time has expired.


               Amendment Nos. 2297 through 2301, En Bloc

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I have five agreed-upon amendments. I ask 
unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside and that 
these five amendments be considered en bloc. 

[[Page S 11888]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Washington [Mr. Gorton] proposes 
     amendments numbered 2297 through 2301, en bloc.

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendments be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendments are as follows:
                           amendment no. 2297

  (Purpose: To allow the National Park Service's American Battlefield 
        Protection Program to enter into cooperative agreements)

       At the appropriate place, insert: ``Notwithstanding other 
     provisions of law, the National Park Service's American 
     Battlefield Protection Program may enter into cooperative 
     agreements, grants, contracts, or other generally accepted 
     means of financial assistance with federal, state, local, and 
     tribal governments; other public entities; educational 
     institutions; and private, non-profit organizations for the 
     purpose of identifying, evaluating, and protecting historic 
     battlefields and associated sites.''
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 2298

       On page 55, line 13 strike ``.'' and insert ``, or''.
       On page 55, line 14 insert the following:
       ``(3) fail to reach a mutual agreement that addresses the 
     concerns of affected parties within 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.''
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 2299

       On page 114, line 9, strike $1,600,000 and insert 
     $4,000,000.
       On page 115, line 1, after ``funds'' insert the word 
     ``generally''.
                                                                    ____



                           amendment no. 2300

       On page 103, on line 25 strike ``.'' and insert the 
     following: ``, unless the relevant agencies of the Department 
     of Interior and/or Agriculture follow appropriate 
     reprogramming guidelines. Provided further: if no funds are 
     provided for the AmeriCorps program by the VA-HUD and 
     Independent Agencies fiscal year 1996 appropriations bill, 
     then none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act may be used for the AmeriCorps 
     program.''
                                                                    ____

                           amendment no. 2301

(Purpose: To require certain Federal agencies to prepare and submit to 
     Congress rankings of the proposals of such agencies for land 
                              acquisition)

       On page 136, between lines 12 and 13, insert the following:
       Sec. 330. (a)(1) The head of each agency referred to in 
     paragraph (2) shall submit to the President each year, 
     through the head of the department having jurisdiction over 
     the agency, a land acquisition ranking for the agency 
     concerned for the fiscal year beginning after the date of the 
     submittal of the report.
       (2) The heads of agencies referred to in paragraph (1) are 
     the following:
       (A) The Director of the National Park Service in the case 
     of the National Park Service.
       (B) The Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service in the 
     case of the Fish and Wildlife Service.
       (C) The Director of the Bureau of Land Management in the 
     case of the Bureau of Land Management.
       (D) The Chief of the Forest Service in the case of the 
     Forest Service.
       (3) In this section, the term ``land acquisition ranking'', 
     in the case of a Federal agency, means a statement of the 
     order of precedence of the land acquisition proposals of the 
     agency, including a statement of the order of precedence of 
     such proposals for each organizational unit of the agency.
       (b) The President shall include the land acquisition 
     rankings for a fiscal year that are submitted to the 
     President under subsection (a)(1) in the supporting 
     information submitted to Congress with the budget for that 
     fiscal year under section 1105 of title 31, United States 
     Code.
       (c)(1) The head of the agency concerned shall determine the 
     order of precedence of land acquisitions proposals under 
     subsection (a)(1) in accordance with criteria that the 
     Secretary of the Department having jurisdiction over the 
     agency shall prescribe.
       (2) The criteria prescribed under paragraph (1) shall 
     provide for a determination of the order of precedence of 
     land acquisition proposals through consideration of--
       (A) the natural resources located on the land covered by 
     the acquisition proposals;
       (B) the degree to which such resources are threatened;
       (C) the length of time required for the acquisition of the 
     land;
       (D) the extend, if any, to which an increase in the cost of 
     the land covered by the proposals makes timely completion of 
     the acquisition advisable;
       (E) the extent of public support for the acquisition of the 
     land; and
       (F) such other matters as the Secretary concerned shall 
     prescribe.

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, the first amendment, No. 2297, is 
presented on behalf of Senator Jeffords from Vermont. It has to do with 
the National Park Service, American Battlefield Protection Program, the 
use of cooperative agreements.
  The next three amendments are offered on behalf of the other Senator 
from the State of Washington [Mrs. Murray], and myself: One, No. 2298, 
modifying Lummi Indian language; the second, No. 2299, modifying 
Columbia Basin Ecosystem Project language; the third, No. 2300, 
modifying AmeriCorps language modification; and the fifth amendment, 
No, 2301, is from the Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain], on land 
acquisition priority list requirement.
  None of these amendments changes the total amounts of appropriations 
within the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendments, 
en bloc.
  The amendments (Nos. 2297 through 2301) were agreed to, en bloc.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
amendments were agreed to.
  Mr. BYRD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

                          ____________________