[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 119 (Tuesday, September 14, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10828-S10847]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page S10828]]
 DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT 2000--
                               Continued


  Amendments Nos. 1628, 1629, 1630, 1631, 1632, 1633, 1634, 1635, and 
                                  1636

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I send a package of amendments to the desk 
and ask unanimous consent they be numbered separately. These amendments 
have been cleared on both sides.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GORTON. For anyone who is listening, these amendments include one 
by the Senator from North Dakota, Mr. Dorgan, on National Forest-
dependent rural communities; two by myself, one technical and one with 
respect to a Plum Creek land exchange; one by Senator Kyl of Arizona 
with respect to funding for tribal school operations; two by Senator 
Reid of Nevada on conveyances in that State; one by Senators Murkowski, 
Bingaman, and Cochran with respect to Federal energy use, to which is 
appended a statement by Senator Cochran; and one by Senators Breaux and 
Landrieu with respect to Fish and Wildlife Service authority to retain 
and use certain fees.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent those amendments 
be agreed to en bloc.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendments are agreed 
to.
  The amendments agreed to en bloc are as follows:


                           AMENDMENT NO. 1628

    (Purpose: To make technical corrections to the National Forest-
   Dependent Rural Communities Economic Diversification Act of 1990)

       On page 132, between lines 20 and 21, insert the following:

     SEC. 3____. NATIONAL FOREST-DEPENDENT RURAL COMMUNITIES 
                   ECONOMIC DIVERSIFICATION.

       (a) Findings and Purposes.--Section 2373 of the National 
     Forest-Dependent Rural Communities Economic Diversification 
     Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 6611) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (2), by striking ``national forests'' and 
     inserting ``National Forest System land'';
       (B) in paragraph (4), by striking ``the national forests'' 
     and inserting ``National Forest System land'';
       (C) in paragraph (5), by striking ``forest resources'' and 
     inserting ``natural resources''; and
       (D) in paragraph (6), by striking ``national forest 
     resources'' and inserting ``National Forest System land 
     resources''; and
       (2) in subsection (b)(1)--
       (A) by striking ``national forests'' and inserting 
     ``National Forest System land''; and
       (B) by striking ``forest resources'' and inserting 
     ``natural resources''.
       (b) Definitions.--Section 2374(1) of the National Forest-
     Dependent Rural Communities Economic Diversification Act of 
     1990 (7 U.S.C. 6612(1)) is amended by striking ``forestry'' 
     and inserting ``natural resources''.
       (c) Rural Forestry and Economic Diversification Action 
     Teams.--Section 2375(b) of the National Forest-Dependent 
     Rural Communities Economic Diversification Act of 1990 (7 
     U.S.C. 6613(b)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``forestry'' and 
     inserting ``natural resources''; and
       (2) in the second and third sentences, by striking 
     ``national forest resources'' and inserting ``National Forest 
     System land resources''.
       (d) Action Plan Implementation.--Section 2376(a) of the 
     National Forest-Dependent Rural Communities Economic 
     Diversification Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 6614(a)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``forest resources'' and inserting 
     ``natural resources''; and
       (2) by striking ``national forest resources'' and inserting 
     ``National Forest System land resources''.
       (e) Training and Education.--Paragraphs (3) and (4) of 
     section 2377(a) of the National Forest-Dependent Rural 
     Communities Economic Diversification Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 
     6615(a)) are amended by striking ``national forest 
     resources'' and inserting ``National Forest System land 
     resources''.
       (f) Loans to Economically Disadvantaged Rural 
     Communities.--Paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 2378(a) of 
     the National Forest-Dependent Rural Communities Economic 
     Diversification Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 6616(a)) are amended by 
     striking ``national forest resources'' and inserting 
     ``National Forest System land resources''.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1629

     (Purpose: To make a technical correction to a U.S. Code cite)

       On page 14, line 6, strike ``(22 U.S.C. aa-1)'' and insert 
     ``(22 U.S.C. 2799aa-1)''
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1630

       Insert at the end of Title III in H.R. 2466:

     SEC.   . INTERSTATE 90 LAND EXCHANGE.

       (a) Section 604(a) of the Interstate 90 Land Exchange Act 
     of 1998, 105 Pub. L. 277, 12 Stat. 2681-326 (1998) is hereby 
     amended by adding at the end of the first sentence: ``except 
     title to offered lands and interests in lands described in 
     section 605(c)(2)(Q, R, S, and T) must be placed in escrow by 
     Plum Creek, according to terms and conditions acceptable to 
     the Secretary and Plum Creek, for a three year period 
     beginning on the later of the date of enactment of this Act 
     of consummation of the exchange. During the period the lands 
     are held in escrow, Plum Creek shall not undertake any 
     activities on these lands, except for fire suppression and 
     road maintenance, without the approval of the Secretary, 
     which shall not be unreasonably withheld.''
       (b) Section 604(b) of the Interstate 90 Land Exchange Act 
     of 1998, 105 Pub. Law 277, 12 Stat. 2681-326 (1998), is 
     hereby amended by inserting after the words ``offered land'' 
     the following: ``as provided in section 604(a), and placement 
     in escrow of acceptable title to the offered lands described 
     in section 605(c)(2)(Q, R, S, and T).''
       (c) Section 604(b) is further amended by adding the 
     following at the end of the first sentence: ``except Township 
     19 North, Range 10 East, W.M., Section 4, Township 20 North, 
     Range 10 East, W.M., Section 32, and Township 21 North, Range 
     14 East, W.M., W\1/2\W\1/2\ of Section 16, which shall be 
     retained by the United States.'' The appraisal approved by 
     the Secretary of Agriculture on July 14, 1999 (the 
     ``Appraisal'') shall be adjusted by subtracting the values 
     determined for Township 19 North, Range 10 East, W.M., 
     Section 4 and Township 20 North, Range 10 East, W.M., Section 
     32 during the Appraisal process in the context of the whole 
     estate to be conveyed.
       (d) After adjustment of the Appraisal, the value of the 
     offered and selected lands, including the offered lands held 
     in escrow, shall be equalized as provided in section 605(c) 
     except that the Secretary also may equalize values through 
     the following, including any combination thereof:
       (1) conveyance of any other lands under the jurisdiction of 
     the Secretary acceptable to Plum Creek and the Secretary 
     after compliance with all applicable Federal environmental 
     and other laws; and
       (2) to the extent sufficient acceptable lands are not 
     available pursuant to paragraph (1) of this subsection, cash 
     payments as and to the extent funds become available through 
     appropriations, private sources, or, if necessary, by 
     reprogramming.
       (e) The Secretary shall promptly seek to identify lands 
     acceptable for conveyance to equalize values under paragraph 
     (1) of subsection (d) and shall, not later than May 1, 2000, 
     provide a report to Congress outlining the results of such 
     efforts.
       (f) As funds or lands are provided to Plum Creek by the 
     Secretary; Plum Creek shall release to the United States 
     deeds for lands and interests in land held in escrow based on 
     the values determined during the Appraisal process in the 
     context of the whole estate to be conveyed. Deeds shall be 
     released for lands and interests in lands in the exact 
     reverse order listed in section 605(c)(2).
       (g) Section 606(d) is hereby amended to read as follows: 
     ``the Secretary and Plum Creek shall make the adjustments 
     directed in section 604(b) and consummate the land exchange 
     within 30 days of enactment of the Interstate 90 Land 
     Exchange Amendment, unless the Secretary and Plum Creek 
     mutually agree to extend the consummation date.''

     SEC.   . THE SNOQUALMIE NATIONAL FOREST BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT 
                   ACT OF 1999.

       (a) In General.--The boundary of the Snoqualmie National 
     Forest is hereby adjusted as generally depicted on a map 
     entitled ``Snoqualmie National Forest 1999 Boundary 
     Adjustment'' dated June 30, 1999. Such map, together with a 
     legal description of all lands included in the boundary 
     adjustment, shall be on file and available for public 
     inspection in the Office of the Chief of the Forest Service 
     in Washington, District of Columbia. Nothing in this 
     subsection shall limit the authority of the Secretary of 
     Agriculture to adjust the boundary pursuant to section 11 of 
     the Weeks Law of March 1, 1911.
       (b) Rule for Land and Water Conservation Fund.--For the 
     purposes of section 7 of the Land and Water Conservation Fund 
     Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 4601-9), the boundary of the 
     Snoqualmie National Forest, as adjusted by this subsection 
     (a), shall be considered to be the boundary of the Forest as 
     of January 1, 1965.

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I will comment further on that amendment. 
A number of objections from people in the vicinity of a portion of that 
land exchange were made both to me and to my colleague, Senator Murray. 
The letter responds to many of those concerns, and others will be 
responded to by the Plum Creek Company itself.
  I would like to say a number of those objections were valid 
objections and deeply concerned this Senator, and we hope they will 
largely be alleviated by the prompt response of Plum Creek.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent a letter addressed to me from 
Plum Creek be printed in connection with the Plum Creek land exchange 
amendment.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:


[[Page S10829]]




                                        Plum Creek Timber Co.,

                                  Seattle, WA, September 14, 1999.
     Hon. Slade Gorton,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Gorton: We greatly appreciate your continuing 
     efforts to resolve the issues created by the discovery of 
     marbled murrelets on lands to be acquired by Plum Creek as 
     part of the I-90 Land Exchange. Plum Creek agrees with the 
     legislative language worked out by your office and the U.S. 
     Forest Service to accommodate the new lands package and we 
     are prepared to assist in any way that we can.
       We are aware that some opposition has developed over the 
     lands near Randle, Washington, that Plum Creek would receive 
     in the exchange. The opponents have painted a dismal scenario 
     of what Plum Creek might do when the exchange is complete and 
     we want to assure you of the facts.
       First, Plum Creek has an excellent reputation of including 
     neighbors and local communities in the planning process. We 
     have not yet developed any specific plans for the Randle 
     area, and will not until we have met with community leaders 
     and heard first-hand their concerns. We are prepared to 
     consider any options that will help to resolve the issues.
       Second, our own standards and the strict forest practice 
     rules of the state of Washington require that great care be 
     taken to identify and avoid any areas of geological concern, 
     such as unstable soils and steep slopes. Indeed, after 
     extensive public study and comment, nearly 10,000 acres of 
     U.S. Forest Service land was removed from consideration early 
     in the exchange process for just this reason. The land that 
     remains in the exchange has been thoroughly studied and can, 
     with careful planning, be managed in a thoughtful and 
     appropriate manner.
       Third, any Plum Creek operations will be strictly governed 
     by our own Environmental Principles and the standards of the 
     American Forest and Paper Association's Sustainable Forestry 
     Initiative.
       Plum Creek is willing to continue to work with local 
     citizens, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Delegation to 
     resolve important issues upon completion of the I-90 Land 
     Exchange. We continue to believe the Exchange is a fair deal 
     for Plum Creek and a great deal for the public.
                                                       Bill Brown.

  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, included within the Manager's amendment 
to the FY 2000 Interior Appropriations bill is a technical fix to last 
year's legislated I-90 Land Exchange. The amendment to the legislation 
was necessary to address to discovery of nesting marbled murrelets on 
two parcels of Forest Service land originally set to be exchanged to 
Plum Creek Timber Company. The language in the amendment is agreeable 
to both the Forest Service and Plum Creek.
  Other issues, particularly that of potential landslides on parcels of 
land being transferred to Plum Creek near the town of Randle, 
Washington, have recently arisen. Members of the community are fearful 
that if some of these lands are harvested by Plum Creek that dangerous 
landslides are possible. I believe this a legitimate concern and have 
begun discussions with the Forest Service, Plum Creek, Congressman 
Baird and Senator Gorton as to possible solutions. I believe, however, 
that the land exchange is a benefit to the people of Washington and 
should proceed as we continue to work on the issue of concern to Randle 
residents.
  I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter to me 
from Plum Creek regarding the company's commitment to protecting the 
welfare of local communities, the forest land it acquires, and 
willingness to work with all parties to address the issues in Randle. I 
hope, that if a solution to the issues of concern to Randle residents 
is found in time, that such a solution be placed into the Interior bill 
at conference.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                        Plum Creek Timber Co.,

                                  Seattle, WA, September 14, 1999.
     Hon. Patty Murray,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Murray: We greatly appreciate your continuing 
     efforts to resolve the issues created by the discovery of 
     marbled murrelets on lands to be acquired by Plum Creek as 
     part of the I-90 Land Exchange. Plum Creek agrees with the 
     legislative language worked out by your office and the U.S. 
     Forest Service to accommodate the new lands package and we 
     are prepared to assist in any way that we can.
       We are aware that some opposition has developed over the 
     lands near Randle, Washington, that Plum Creek would receive 
     in the exchange. The opponents have painted a dismal scenario 
     of what Plum Creek might do when the exchange is complete and 
     we want to assure you of the facts.
       First, Plum Creek has an excellent reputation of including 
     neighbors and local communities in the planning process. We 
     have not yet developed any specific plans for the Randle 
     area, and will not until we have met with community leaders 
     and heard first-hand their concerns. We are prepared to 
     consider any options that will help to resolve the issues.
       Second, our own standards and the strict forest practice 
     rules of the state of Washington require that great care be 
     taken to identify and avoid any areas of geological concern, 
     such as unstable soils and steep slopes. Indeed, after 
     extensive public study and comment, nearly 10,000 acres of 
     U.S. Forest Service land was removed from consideration early 
     in the exchange process for just this reason. The land that 
     remains in the exchange has been thoroughly studied and can, 
     with careful planning, be managed in a thoughtful and 
     appropriate manner.
       Third, any Plum Creek operations will be strictly governed 
     by our own Environmental Principles and the standards of the 
     American Forest and Paper Association's Sustainable Forestry 
     Initiative.
       Plum Creek is willing to continue to work with local 
     citizens, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Delegation to 
     resolve important issues upon completion of the I-90 Land 
     Exchange. We continue to believe the Exchange is a fair deal 
     for Plum Creek and a great deal for the public.
                                                       Bill Brown.

                           AMENDMENT NO. 1631

  (Purpose: To clarify that a Bureau-funded school may share a campus 
  with a school that offers expanded grades and that is not a Bureau-
                             funded school)

       On page 33, line 18, after the period, insert the 
     following: ``Funds made available under this Act may be used 
     to fund a Bureau-funded school (as that term is defined in 
     section 1146 of the Education Amendments of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 
     2026)) that shares a campus with a school that offers 
     expanded grades and that is not a Bureau-funded school, if 
     the jointly incurred costs of both schools are apportioned 
     between the 2 programs of the schools in such manner as to 
     ensure that the expanded grades are funded solely from funds 
     that are not made available through the Bureau.''.
                                  ____



                           AMENDMENT NO. 1632

  (Purpose: To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain 
          land to Nye County, Nevada, and for other purposes)

       At the end of title I, insert the following:

     SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE TO NYE COUNTY, NEVADA.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) County.--The term ``County'' means Nye County, Nevada.
       (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior, acting through the Director of the Bureau of 
     Land Management.
       (b) Parcels Conveyed for Use of the Nevada Science and 
     Technology Center.--
       (1) In general.--For no consideration and at no other cost 
     to the County, the Secretary shall convey to the County, 
     subject to valid existing rights, all right, title, and 
     interest in and to the parcels of public land described in 
     paragraph (2).
       (2) Land description.--The parcels of public land referred 
     to in paragraph (1) are the following:
       (A) The portion of Sec. 13 north of United States Route 95, 
     T. 15 S. R. 49 E, Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada.
       (B) In Sec. 18, T. 15 S., R. 50 E., Mount Diablo Meridian, 
     Nevada:
       (i) W \1/2\ W \1/2\ NW \1/4\.
       (ii) The portion of the W \1/2\ W \1/2\ SW \1/4\ north of 
     United States Route 95.
       (3) Use.--
       (A) In general.--The parcels described in paragraph (2) 
     shall be used for the construction and operation of the 
     Nevada Science and Technology Center as a nonprofit museum 
     and exposition center, and related facilities and activities.
       (B) Reversion.--The conveyance of any parcel described in 
     paragraph (2) shall be subject to reversion to the United 
     States, at the discretion of Secretary, if the parcel is used 
     for a purpose other than that specified in subparagraph (A).
       (b) Parcels Conveyed for Other Use for a commercial 
     purpose.--
       (1) Right to purchase.--For a period of 5 years beginning 
     on the date of enactment of this Act, the County shall have 
     the exclusive right to purchase the parcels of public land 
     described in paragraph (2) for the fair market value of the 
     parcels, as determined by the Secretary.
       (2) Land description.--The parcels of public land referred 
     to in paragraph (1) are the following parcels in Sec. 18, T. 
     15 S., R. 50 E., Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada:
       (A) E \1/2\ NW \1/4\.
       (B)E \1/2\ W \1/2\ NW \1/4\.
       (C) The portion of the E \1/2\ SW \1/4\ north of United 
     States Route 95.
       (D) The portion of the E \1/2\ W \1/2\ SW \1/4\ north of 
     United States Route 95.
       (E) The portion of the SE \1/4\ north of United States 
     Route 95.
       (3) Use of proceeds.--Proceeds of a sale of a parcel 
     described in paragraph (2)--
       (A) shall be deposited in the special account established 
     under section 4(e)(1)(C) of the Southern Nevada Public Land 
     Management Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2345); and
       (B) shall be available for use by the Secretary--
       (i) to reimburse costs incurred by the local offices of the 
     Bureau of Land Management in

[[Page S10830]]

     arranging the land conveyances directed by this Act; and
       (ii) as provided in section 4(e)(3) of that Act (112 Stat. 
     2346).
                                  ____



                           AMENDMENT NO. 1633

 (Purpose: To give the city of Mesquite, Nevada, the right to purchase 
    at fair market value certain parcels of public land in the city)

       At the end of title I, insert the following:

     SEC. ____. CONVEYANCE OF LAND TO CITY OF MESQUITE, NEVADA.

       Section 3 of Public Law 99-548 (100 Stat. 3061; 110 Stat. 
     3009-202) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Fifth Area.--
       ``(1) Right to purchase.--For a period of 12 years after 
     the date of enactment of this Act, the city of Mesquite, 
     Nevada, shall have the exclusive right to purchase the 
     parcels of public land described in paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Land description.--The parcels of public land 
     referred to in paragraph (1) are as follows:
       ``(A) In T. 13 S., R. 70 E., Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada:
       ``(i) The portion of sec. 27 north of Interstate Route 15.
       ``(ii) Sec. 28: NE \1/4\, S \1/2\ (except the Interstate 
     Route 15 right-of-way).
       ``(iii) Sec. 29: E \1/2\ NE \1/4\ SE \1/4\, SE \1/4\ SE \1/
     4\.
       ``(iv) The portion of sec. 30 south of Interstate Route 15.
       ``(v) The portion of sec. 31 south of Interstate Route 15.
       ``(vi) Sec. 32: NE \1/4\ NE \1/4\ (except the Interstate 
     Route 15 right-of-way), the portion of NW \1/4\ NE \1/4\ 
     south of Interstate Route 15, and the portion of W \1/2\ 
     south of Interstate Route 15.
       ``(vii) The portion of sec. 33 north of Interstate Route 
     15.
       ``(B) In T. 14 S., R. 70 E., Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada:
       ``(i) Sec. 5: NW \1/4\.
       ``(ii) Sec. 6: N \1/2\.
       ``(C) In T. 13 S., R. 69 E., Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada:
       ``(i) The portion of sec. 25 south of Interstate Route 15.
       ``(ii) The portion of sec. 26 south of Interstate Route 15.
       ``(iii) The portion of sec. 27 south of Interstate Route 
     15.
       ``(iv) Sec. 28: SW \1/4\ SE \1/4\.
       ``(v) Sec. 33: E \1/2\.
       ``(vi) Sec. 34.
       ``(vii) Sec. 35.
       ``(viii) Sec. 36.
       ``(3) Notification.--Not later than 10 years after the date 
     of enactment of this subsection, the city shall notify the 
     Secretary which of the parcels of public land described in 
     paragraph (2) the city intends to purchase.
       ``(4) Conveyance.--Not later than 1 year after receiving 
     notification from the city under paragraph (3), the Secretary 
     shall convey to the city the land selected for purchase.
       ``(5) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid existing rights, until 
     the date that is 12 years after the date of enactment of this 
     subsection, the parcels of public land described in paragraph 
     (2) are withdrawn from all forms of entry and appropriation 
     under the public land laws, including the mining laws, and 
     from operation of the mineral leasing and geothermal leasing 
     laws.
       ``(6) Use of proceeds.--The proceeds of the sale of each 
     parcel--
       ``(A) shall be deposited in the special account established 
     under section 4(e)(1)(C) of the Southern Nevada Public Land 
     Management Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2345); and
       ``(B) shall be available for use by the Secretary--
       ``(i) to reimburse costs incurred by the local offices of 
     the Bureau of Land Managment in arranging the land 
     conveyances directed by this Act; and
       ``(ii) as provided in section 4(e)(3) of that Act (112 
     Stat. 2346).
       ``(f) Sixth Area.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall convey to 
     the city of Mesquite, Nevada, in accordance with section 
     47125 of title 49, United States Code, up to 2,560 acres of 
     public land to be selected by the city from among the parcels 
     of land described in paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Land description.--The parcels of land referred to in 
     paragraph (1) are as follows:
       ``(A) In T. 13 S., R. 69 E., Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada:
       ``(i) The portion of sec. 28 south of Interstate Route 15 
     (except S \1/2\ SE \1/4\).
       ``(ii) The portion of sec. 29 south of Interstate Route 15.
       ``(iii) The portion of sec. 30 south of Interstate Route 
     15.
       ``(iv) The portion of sec. 31 south of Interstate Route 15.
       ``(v) Sec. 32.
       ``(vi) Sec. 33: W \1/2\.
       ``(B) In T. 14 S., R. 69 E., Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada:
       ``(i) Sec. 4.
       ``(ii) Sec. 5.
       ``(iii) Sec. 6.
       ``(iv) Sec. 8.
       ``(C) In T. 14 S., R. 68 E., Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada:
       ``(i) Sec. 1.
       ``(ii) Sec. 12.
       ``(3) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid existing rights, until 
     the date that is 12 years after the date of enactment of this 
     subsection, the parcels of public land described in paragraph 
     (2) are withdrawn from all forms of entry and appropriation 
     under the public land laws, including the mining laws, and 
     from operation of the mineral leasing and geothermal leasing 
     laws.''.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1634

       At the end of Title III, insert the following:
       Sec.  . Section 1770(d) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (7 
     U.S.C. 2276(d)) is amended by redesignating paragraph (10) as 
     paragraph (11) and by inserting after paragraph (9) the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(10) section 3(e) of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable 
     Resources Research Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 1642(e));''.
                                  ____



                           AMENDMENT NO. 1635

     (Purpose: To prevent expenditure of funds that may be used to 
circumvent or contradict existing law and policy regarding the Federal 
                Government's energy efficiency programs)

       Insert at the end of Title III the following new section:
       ``Sec.  . None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act may be used to implement or enforce any 
     provision in Presidential Executive Order 13123 regarding the 
     Federal Energy Management Program which circumvents or 
     contradicts any statutes relevant to Federal energy use and 
     the measurement thereof, including, but not limited to, the 
     existing statutory mandate that life-cycle cost effective 
     measures be undertaken at federal facilities to save energy 
     and reduce the operational expenditures of the government.''.

  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I support the energy efficiency amendment 
contained in the package of amendments managed by the chairman of the 
subcommittee.
  This amendment, which I have sponsored along with Senators Murkowski 
and Bingaman, clarifies, with respect to the measurement of energy use 
by the Federal government, that the directives contained in 
Presidential Executive Order 13123 cannot circumvent or contradict any 
relevant statues.
  The Appropriations Committee addressed this matter last year, when 
Senator Murkowski and Senator Byrd worked to clarify the intent of 
Congress with respect to energy use and energy measurement. As a result 
of their efforts, the conference report on the Omnibus Appropriations 
bill included language that has the same effect as the amendment we 
propose today--that is, the federal government shall obey existing 
laws, that proposed changes to the law are subject to the jurisdiction 
of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and that the 
law cannot be changed by committee report language, executive order or 
any other mechanism that would circumvent the jurisdiction of the 
authorizing committee.
  Mr. President, this amendment will remedy flaws in the Executive 
Order, most of which represents a laudable effort to save taxpayer 
dollars by increasing energy efficiency in federal buildings.
  I thank Chairman Gorton, Energy Committee Chairman Murkowski, ranking 
member Bingaman, and their staffs for working to resolve this issue.


                           Amendment No. 1636

(Purpose: To authorize the Fish and Wildlife Service to retain and use 
 fees collected for certain damages caused to national wildlife refuge 
  lands in Louisiana and Texas to assess and mitigate or restore the 
 damaged resources, and monitor and study the recovery of such damaged 
                               resources)

       On page 12, line 12, before the final period, insert the 
     following: ``: Provided further, That all funds received by 
     the United States Fish and Wildlife Service from responsible 
     parties, heretofore and through fiscal year 2000, for site-
     specific damages to National Wildlife Refuge System lands 
     resulting from the exercise of privately-owned oil and gas 
     rights associated with such lands in the States of Louisiana 
     and Texas (other than damages recoverable under the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and 
     Liability Act (26 U.S.C. 4611 et seq.), the Oil Pollution Act 
     (33 U.S.C. 1301 et seq.), or section 311 of the Clean Water 
     Act (33 U.S.C. 1321 et seq.)), shall be available to the 
     Secretary, without further appropriation and until expended 
     to: (1) complete damage assessments of the impacted site by 
     the Secretary; (2) mitigate or restore the damaged resources; 
     and (3) monitor and study the recovery of such damaged 
     resources''.


  Amendments Nos. 1371, 1408, 1587, 1593, 1595, 1600, 1601, 1610, and 
                                  1613

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I send a package of numbered amendments to 
the desk with modifications and ask unanimous consent that these 
amendments be adopted en bloc. They have been cleared on both sides.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendments will be 
appropriately numbered.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, again, the same explanation. These 
amendments include one from the Senator

[[Page S10831]]

from Maine, Ms. Collins, with respect to St. Croix Island International 
Historic Site; one by the Senator from Utah, Mr. Hatch, with respect to 
Lake Powell; one from Senator Murkowski with respect to inspection fees 
for imported skins and furs; one from Senators Murkowski, Campbell, 
Inouye, and Johnson with respect to the Indian Trust Asset and 
Accounting Management System; one from Senator Campbell with respect to 
pine beetle eradication; one from Senator Bryan and Senator Reid of 
Nevada with respect to Grand Canyon overflights; one from Senator Burns 
with respect to grizzly bear reintroduction--Senator Craig is a 
cosponsor of Senator Burns' amendment--one from Senator Stevens with 
respect to Haines Borough in Alaska; and one from Senator Durbin with 
respect to Shawnee National Forest.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendments are agreed 
to.
  The amendments agreed to en bloc are as follows:


                           amendment no. 1371

(Purpose: To place a requirement on the use of funds for development of 
a resource management plan and for timber sales in the Shawnee National 
                           Forest, Illinois)

       At the end of the bill add the following:

     SEC. 3  . SHAWNEE NATIONAL FOREST, ILLINOIS.

       None of the funds made available under this Act may be used 
     to--
       (1) develop a resource management plan for the Shawnee 
     National Forest, Illinois; or
       (2) make a sale of timber for commodity purposes produced 
     on land in the Shawnee National Forest from which the 
     expected cost of making the timber available for sale is 
     greater than the expected revenue to the United States from 
     the sale.


                     amendment no. 1408 as modified

(Purpose: To prevent the physical reintroduction of grizzly bears into 
the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness of Idaho and Montana in FY2000 and to 
          allow for greater public involvement in the project)

       Insert in general provisions, Title III, the following:
       None of the funds made available by this Act may be used 
     for the physical relocation of grizzly bears into the Selway-
     Bitterroot Wilderness of Idaho and Montana.

  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I wish to discuss an amendment originally 
offered by my colleague from Montana to prohibit the reintroduction of 
the grizzly bear in the Selway-Bitterroot area of Idaho and Montana. 
This language is being included in the managers' amendment.
  I strongly support reintroduction of the grizzly bears under the 
Endangered Species Act. Presently in the lower 48 States, there are 
only 800 to 1000 bears in scattered pockets of habitat in Idaho, 
Montana and Washington. Large species such as the grizzly are most 
vulnerable when they are limited to small populations and confined to 
small portions of habitat. Because grizzlies are not likely to migrate 
beyond the pockets in which they now exist, they are not likely to find 
their own way to the Selway-Bitterroot area, even though it is an area 
they once inhabited. The reintroduction of grizzlies in this area will 
greatly bolster efforts to recover grizzlies in the lower 48 States.
  The current proposal by the Fish and Wildlife Service establishes a 
Citizen Management Committee to make the primary decisions on 
reintroduction and management. This committee would consist of 15 
members, with 7 chosen by the Governor of Idaho, 5 chosen by the 
Governor of Montana, one chosen by the Nez Perce Tribe, one chosen by 
the Chief of the Forest Service and one chosen by the Director of the 
Fish and Wildlife Service. The committee would have authority to 
establish specific recovery goals, determine areas for reintroduction, 
and establish land-use standards.
  This proposal has been developed after tremendous public involvement 
and outreach. Since 1992, with the formation of a citizens' group, 
local individuals and industries have been involved in the decisions 
relating to grizzly bear recovery in Idaho and Montana. Preparation of 
both the draft and final Environmental Impact Statements provided 
significant opportunity for public comment. In sum, the proposal has 
been developed with painstaking effort and deliberation.
  The result is a coalition of supporters among timber companies, 
ranchers, and environmental groups. Governor Racicot of Montana has 
long backed the reintroduction plan. While Governor Kempthorne opposes 
the plan, he recently stated that he wants Idaho to take a strong 
leadership role if the reintroduction is going to happen. Numerous 
newspapers in both states have endorsed the plan.
  Nevertheless, there continues to be opposition to the proposal among 
numerous local citizens, particularly within the Valley in Montana 
along the eastern border of the Selway-Bitterroot area. I strongly 
encourage both the Fish and Wildlife Service and Forest Service to 
continue their outreach and education efforts, and to address the 
concerns of these citizens.
  Mr. President, you may recall that this Chamber has seen fierce 
opposition to the reintroduction of other species in an effort to 
recover them under the ESA. Specifically, we have debated 
reintroductions of the red wolf in North Carolina in 1995 and the gray 
wolf in Yellowstone in 1996. What has come of those programs? Nothing 
but tremendous success. Both species are close to full recovery. Both 
programs resulted in less livestock depredation than originally 
predicted. Both programs cost less to the Federal taxpayer than 
originally estimated. Have there been occasional problems with 
individual wolves? Of course. But each program had provided for such 
occasions, and problems were addressed efficiently and expeditiously.
  With the care and attention that has been poured into the grizzly 
bear program from not just the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Forest 
Service, but local citizens, industries, conservation groups and of 
course the States, I have no doubt that this program will also be a 
success.
  Indeed, I will venture to say that, in hindsight, we will marvel at 
the ability of Nature to take over the grizzly bear program--as it has 
with the Yellowstone gray wolves and North Carolina red wolves--and run 
its own course smoothly, with nothing more than a little encouragement 
from us. All we need to do is to provide that encouragement.
  I do not oppose the amendment adopted today by the managers of the 
bill, but that is only because it is narrowly limited to a prohibition 
of funds for physical relocation of bears in the Selway-Bitterroot 
area. The Service does not intend to relocate bears into the area 
before FY 2001. The language does not prohibit completion of the EIS 
and the Record of Decision, publication of a rulemaking under section 
10(j) of the ESA, or activities to provide outreach and to set up the 
citizen's committee. It will not prevent activities in FY 2000 in 
support of reintroduction, short of physically relocating grizzlies in 
the area. Because the language does not prohibit what the Service would 
otherwise do in FY 2000, I do not oppose the language.
  I yield the floor.


                     amendment no. 1587 as modified

(Purpose: to establish the scientific basis for noise standards applied 
                   to the Grand Canyon National Park)

       At the end of Title I, add the following new section:
       Sec.   . No funds appropriated under this Act shall be 
     expended to implement sound thresholds or standards in the 
     Grand Canyon National Park until 90 days after the National 
     Park Service has provided to the Congress a report describing 
     (1) the reasonable scientific basis for such sound thresholds 
     or standard and (2) the peer review process used to validate 
     such sound thresholds or standard.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1593

 (Purpose: To provide for increased funding of certain programs of the 
         Smithsonian Institution and the Indian Health Service)

       At the appropriate place insert the following new section:
       Sec.   . Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall use any funds previously 
     appropriated for the Department of the Interior for Fiscal 
     Year 1998 for acquisition of lands to acquire land from the 
     Borough of Haines, Alaska for subsequent conveyance to settle 
     claims filed against the United States with respect to land 
     in the Borough of Haines prior to January 1, 1999; Provided 
     further, That the Secretary of the Interior shall not convey 
     lands acquired pursuant to this section unless and until a 
     signed release of claims is executed.
                                  ____



                    amendment no. 1595, as modified

 (Purpose: To require the Forest Service to use appropriated or other 
  funds to improve the control or eradication of pine beetles in the 
              Rocky Mountain region of the United States)

       At the end of Title III, insert the following:
       Sec.   . The Forest Service shall use appropriations or 
     other funds available to the Service to--

[[Page S10832]]

       (1) improve the control or eradication of the pine beetles 
     in the Rocky Mountain region of the United States; and
       (2)(A) conduct a study of the causes and effects of, and 
     solutions for, the infestation of pine beetles in the Rocky 
     Mountain region of the United States; and
       (B) submit to Congress a report on the results of the 
     study, within 6 months of the date of enactment of this 
     provision.
                                  ____



                    amendment no. 1600, as modified

               (Purpose: Making contingent funding plans)

       At the end of Title I insert the following new section:
       None of the funds provided in this Act shall be available 
     to the Department of the Interior to deploy the Trust Asset 
     and Accounting Management System (TAAMS) in any Bureau of 
     Indian Affairs Area Office, with the exception of the 
     Billings Area Office, until 45 days after the Secretary of 
     the Interior certifies in writing to the Committee on 
     Appropriations and the Committee on Indian Affairs that, 
     based on the Secretary's review and analysis, such system 
     meets the TAAMS contract requirements and the needs of the 
     system's customers including the Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
     the Office of Special Trustee for American Indians and 
     affected Indian tribes and individual Indians.
       The Secretary shall certify that the following items have 
     been completed in accordance with generally accepted 
     guidelines for system development and acquisition and 
     indicate the source of those guidelines: design and 
     functional requirements; legacy data conversion and use; 
     system acceptance and user acceptance tests; project 
     management functions such as deployment and implementation 
     planning, risk management, quality assurance, configuration 
     management, and independent verification and validation 
     activities. The General Accounting Office shall provide an 
     independent assessment of the Secretary's certification 
     within 15 days of the Secretary's certification.
                                  ____



                    amendment no. 1601, as modified

         (To assist small exporters of certain animal products)

       At the end of Title I of the bill, insert the following:
       Sec.   . None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available in this Act or any other provision of law, may be 
     used by any officer, employee, department or agency of the 
     United States to impose or require payment of an inspection 
     fee in connection with the import or export of shipments of 
     fur-bearing wildlife containing 1000 or fewer raw, crusted, 
     salted or tanned hides or fur skins, or separate parts 
     thereof, including species listed under the Convention on 
     International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and 
     Flora done at Washington, March 3, 1973 (27 UST 1027).
                                  ____



                      amendment 1610, as modified

       (Purpose: To ban the use of public funds for the study of 
  decommissioning the Glen Canyon Dam or the draining of Lake Powell)

       At the end of Title I insert the following:
       Sec.   . No funds appropriated for the Department of the 
     Interior by this Act or any other Act shall be used to study 
     or implement any plan to drain Lake Powell or to reduce the 
     water level of the lake below the range of water levels 
     required for the operation of the Glen Canyon Dam.
                                  ____



                    AMENDMENT NO. 1613, AS MODIFIED

  (Purpose: Expressing the sense of the Senate that the National Park 
Service should begin planning for the quadricentennial commemoration of 
          the Saint Croix Island International Historic Site)

       On page 62, between lines 3 and 4, insert the following:

     SEC. 1____. QUADRICENTENNIAL COMMEMORATION OF THE SAINT CROIX 
                   ISLAND INTERNATIONAL HISTORIC SITE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) in 1604, 1 of the first European colonization efforts 
     was attempted at St. Croix Island in Calais, Maine;
       (2) St. Croix Island settlement predated both the Jamestown 
     and Plymouth colonies;
       (3) St. Croix Island offers a rare opportunity to preserve 
     and interpret early interactions between European explorers 
     and colonists and Native Americans;
       (4) St. Croix Island is 1 of only 2 international historic 
     sites comprised of land administered by the National Park 
     Service;
       (5) the quadricentennial commemorative celebration honoring 
     the importance of the St. Croix Island settlement to the 
     countries and people of both Canada and the United States is 
     rapidly approaching;
       (6) the 1998 National Park Service management plans and 
     long-range interpretive plan call for enhancing visitor 
     facilities at both Red Beach and downtown Calais;
       (7) in 1982, the Department of the Interior and Canadian 
     Department of the Environment signed a memorandum of 
     understanding to recognize the international significance of 
     St. Croix Island and, in an amendment memorandum, agreed to 
     conduct joint strategic planning for the international 
     commemoration with a special focus on the 400th anniversary 
     of settlement in 2004;
       (8) the Department of Canadian Heritage has installed 
     extensive interpretive sites on the Canadian side of the 
     border; and
       (9) current facilities at Red Beach and Calais are 
     extremely limited or nonexistent for a site of this historic 
     and cultural importance.
       (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate 
     that--
       (1) using funds made available by this Act, the National 
     Park Service should expeditiously pursue planning for 
     exhibits at Red Beach and the town of Calais, Maine; and
       (2) the National Park Service should take what steps are 
     necessary, including consulting with the people of Calais, to 
     ensure that appropriate exhibits at Red Beach and the town of 
     Calais are completed by 2004.

  Mr. GORTON. I now move to reconsider the vote by which both of those 
sets of amendments were adopted, and I move to table my own motion.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


 Amendments Nos. 1359, 1362, 1367, 1493, 1572 1573, 1575, 1578, 1582, 
       1590, 1592, 1597, 1606, 1612, 1615, and 1637 through 1657

  Mr. GORTON. I now send a package of amendments to the desk and ask 
unanimous consent they be considered and agreed to en bloc and numbered 
separately. All of these amendments have been agreed to and cleared by 
both sides.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendments will be 
appropriately numbered.
  Mr. GORTON. This last large package includes a Gorton-Levin-DeWine 
amendment with respect to Great Lakes fish and wildlife restoration and 
spartina grass research; one by Senator Cochran and others with respect 
to the National Endowment for the Humanities; one by Senator Bennett 
and others with respect to the National Endowment for the Arts; one 
from Senator Lieberman with respect to the Weir Farm National Historic 
Site; one by Senator Abraham with respect to Isle Royale National Park; 
one from Senator Jeffords with respect to weatherization assistance 
grants and State energy conservation grants; one by Senators Crapo and 
Burns with respect to cold water fish habitat conservation plans in 
Idaho and Montana; one from Senator Torricelli with respect to 
Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park; one from 
Senator Johnson, Senator Burns, and others with respect to tribally 
controlled community colleges; one from Senator Shelby with respect to 
a wildlife data system in Alabama; one from Senator Inouye and others 
with respect to the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial; one from 
Senator Bingaman with respect to the Youth Conservation Corps; another 
from Senator Bingaman with respect to Indian post-secondary schools and 
changes to the Federal funding formula; one from Senator Kohl with 
respect to UK development LLC; one from Senator Edwards with respect to 
Lake Logan, NC; one from Senator Abraham and others with respect to 
payments in lieu of taxes; one from Senator Murkowski and others with 
respect to the Land and Water Conservation Fund stateside program; one 
from Senator Stevens with respect to the Smithsonian Institution and 
Indian Health Service; one from Senator Levin with respect to the 
Keweenaw National Historic Park in Michigan; one from Senator Collins 
with respect to the St. Croix Island International Historic Site; one 
from Senator Feinstein with respect to Forest Service reimbursement; 
one from Senator Bingaman with respect to municipal energy management; 
one from Senator Byrd with respect o the Wheeling National Heritage 
Area; one from myself with respect to the Forest Service/Weyerhaeuser 
Huckleberry land exchange; one from Senator Reid of Nevada with respect 
to the Weber Dam in Nevada and feasibility study for a tribally 
operated trout fish hatchery on the Walker River; one from Senator 
Stevens with respect to timber pipeline supply on the Tongass National 
Forest; one from Senator Lott with respect to Civil War battlefields; 
one from the two Senators from Minnesota respecting a Minnesota science 
center; one from Senator Kerrey of Nebraska with respect to the Boyer 
Chute National Wildlife Refuge land acquisition; one from Senator Bond 
with respect to Wilson's Creek National Battlefield; one from Senator 
Hollings with respect to Fort Sumter National Monument land 
acquisition; one from Senator Abraham with respect to a Michigan 
community development database; one from Senator Warner with respect to 
sand and gravel; one from Senator

[[Page S10833]]

Torricelli with respect to UPARR; and a final amendment of my own, a 
manager's amendment with respect to the setoffs necessary to pay for 
the other amendments we have adopted or are about to adopt.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendments have been agreed to.
  The amendments agreed to en bloc are as follows:


                           amendment no. 1359

       On page 79, line 19 of the bill, strike ``under this Act or 
     previous appropriations Acts.'' and insert in lieu thereof 
     the following: ``under this or any other Act.''
                                  ____



                    amendment no. 1362, as modified

   (Purpose: To provide funding for the acquisition of the Weir Farm 
         National Historic Site in Connecticut, with an offset)

       On page 18, line 19, before the period, insert the 
     following: ``, and of which not less than $2,000,000 shall be 
     used to acquire the Weir Farm National Historic Site in 
     Connecticut''.
                                  ____



                    amendment no. 1367, as modified

(Purpose: To provide funding for facilities maintenance at Isle Royale 
                             National Park)

       On page 17, line 25, after the colon insert the following: 
     ``Provided further, That $1,000,000 shall be made available 
     for Isle Royale National Park to address visitor facility and 
     infrastructure deterioration:''.
                                  ____



                    amendment No. 1493, as modified

(Purpose: To provide additional funding for the National Endowment for 
                               the Arts)

       On page 94, line 7, strike, ``$86,000,000'' and insert 
     ``$90,000,000''.

  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Bennett-Jeffords-
Reed amendment. For the past 34 years, the National Endowment for the 
Arts has served the public good by nurturing the expression of human 
creativity, supporting the cultivation of community spirit, improving 
our children's education, and fostering the recognition and 
appreciation of our nation's artistic accomplishments.
  The arts and humanities have an immense positive impact on the lives 
of all Americans. Children and adolescents in particular benefit 
tremendously from artistic expression. Studies show again and again 
that comprehensive arts education programs in schools with at-risk 
student populations improve academic achievement; student self-
assurance; creative and critical thinking skills; attendance; as well 
as student and parent attitudes about school.
  And yet, we as a society have consistently underfunded arts education 
and community arts programs at the local, state and federal level. In 
recent years, Congress has exacerbated this situation by dramatically 
reducing funding to the National Endowment for the Arts.
  The NEA has not seen a budget increase in 8 years--not since 1992, 
when the agency had a budget of $175.9 million. In 1996, the NEA's 
budget was slashed by 40% to $99 million, and it has remained near that 
level ever since.
  This year, the President requested an increase of $52 million for the 
NEA, nearly all of which would have been used to pay for a major new 
initiative called Challenge America. A priority of Challenge America 
would be to get NEA funds to areas of the country that have not 
received sufficient funds in the past. Challenge America would focus on 
outreach projects for education, after-school programs using the arts, 
historic preservation, and upgrading the arts infrastructure in our 
communities. In effect, Challenge America would put the arts at the 
center of family and community life.
  Mr. President, by reaching out to new communities and new regions of 
the country, the Challenge America program would directly address the 
concerns that members of this body have expressed with regard to the 
distribution of NEA funds.
  Unfortunately, the Interior spending bill before us contains no 
funding for the Challenge America initiative. The Appropriations 
Committee's report indicates, however, that the lack of funds for 
Challenge America ``should not be interpreted as a lack of support by 
the Committee for the Endowment's proposal.''
  The problem, of course, is the budget. The distinguished Interior 
Subcommittee Chairman and Ranking Member have done an outstanding job 
to report a bill within the tight allocations provided to them. I 
commend them for their effort and fully appreciate the constraints 
within which they operate.
  However, I believe we can, and should, find the money to make the 
Challenge America program a reality and to allow the NEA to do what so 
many members of this body want it to do. At a time when we are 
considering an $800 billion tax cut, I think it is not unreasonable to 
provide a small increase to an agency that has such a meaningful impact 
in communities across the country. This amendment, which would provide 
$4 million in additional funding to the NEA in fiscal year 2000, would 
permit the NEA to get the Challenge America initiative off the ground. 
Every dime of additional money would be used for project grants--mostly 
the small, expedited grants that will get funding to previously 
underserved areas of the country.
  Mr. President, the NEA is under new management. Chairman Bill Ivey 
has worked hard to reform the Endowment's operations and to respond to 
the concerns expressed by members of Congress in recent years.
  It is time we gave the NEA a chance to show that it has changed. 
Let's give it the opportunity to do what we've asked it to do--to get 
more grants to new rural and urban areas, to do more in the area of 
arts education, and to help us rebuild our cities and make them more 
attractive places for people to live and work.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important amendment.
  Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, a number of my colleagues and I have 
advocated a small increase in funding for the National Endowment for 
the Arts. I also want to commend Senator Cochran's efforts to increase 
funds for the National for the Humanities. Neither endowment has 
received a significant increase since their budgets were cut by nearly 
40 percent in fiscal 1996. I believe a $4 million increase is warranted 
given the reforms intended to make the endowments more efficient and 
more accountable have been implemented and we have seen results.
  While a positive story could be told about the National Endowment for 
the Arts, I believe the real story of the NEA and NEH is a local story. 
And in my case, a Utah story. In previous years, I have outlined the 
origins of the strong arts and humanities tradition in Utah. The arts 
flourished in Utah before Utah was even a state. Utah also had one of 
the first publicly funded arts councils in America.
  Today, I would like to tell two stories of traveling exhibition 
programs in the arts and humanities. Both benefit rural areas. Both 
provide communities with opportunities that might not be available 
otherwise. These types of programs make a strong case for a small 
federal investment in the arts and humanities.
  For the last 35 years, the Utah Arts Council's Traveling Exhibition 
Program, supported in part by the National Endowment for the Arts, has 
toured visual arts exhibitions all over Utah. In some areas, 
particularly in the more rural regions of the state, the exhibition is 
the only source of visual arts programming. Utah's San Juan county 
bussed children from surrounding communities to view these exhibitions. 
Another rural county boasted a 100-percent citizen participation for 
one of the exhibits.
  The Utah Arts Council's Traveling Exhibition Program serves more than 
150,000 people in all but two counties of the state each year. Every 
year the Utah Arts Council receives more than 250 requests for the 
program, but is only able to satisfy half. Each Traveling Exhibition 
includes educational materials that emphasize not only the artistic 
aspects of the exhibits, but also its connections to other aspects of 
the curriculum.
  Denise Hoffman, a librarian at the Green River Library and 
participant in the program, made this comment:

       We are a very small and isolated town in rural Utah. Almost 
     every student in the grade school comes to the library on a 
     weekly basis. A vast majority of our students will never be 
     exposed to the arts. We use the traveling exhibitions as a 
     basis for learning. By making these displays easily 
     affordable, you cannot count the young lives that have been 
     touched, or guided into the arts. Please consider dollar for 
     dollar what we are getting with this program. It is critical 
     to us.

  Another program that benefits rural areas is a collaborative project 
between the Smithsonian Institution Traveling Exhibition Services 
(SITES)

[[Page S10834]]

and state humanities councils. Its goal is to give small rural museums 
access to Smithsonian resources. What resulted was a small traveling 
program with Smithsonian type exhibits called ``Museum on Main 
Street.'' The two projects developed under this program are ``Produce 
for Victory: Posters on the American Homefront 1941-1945'' and ``Barn 
Again! Celebrating an American Icon.'' The Utah Humanities Council 
spearheaded this effort and the following communities have participated 
in this program: Castle Dale, population 1,704; Vernal, population 
6,644; Kanab, population 3,289; Wellsville, population 2,206; 
Monticello, population 1,806; Delta population 2,998; Ephraim, 
population 3,363; Heber, population 4,362; and Payson, population 
9,510.

  Castle Dale, Kanab, Payson, Vernal, and Delta hosted their first 
Smithsonian exhibit using ``Produce for Victory'' as a basis for the 
communities to remember what was occurring in America during the years 
1941 through 1945. Each community developed local programs including 
USO dances, ration recipe luncheons, reunions of women who worked in 
munitions industries (``Rosie the Riveter''), discussions of the 1930s 
and 1940s movies and newsreels, and exhibitions of local artifacts.
  Kanab had activities all year commemorating World War II. Events 
included a poster exhibit from the Smithsonian, World War II movies 
from Brigham Young University's film collection, and countless other 
very personal contributions from many of the town's people who had 
directly participated in the war or were relatives of those who had.
  An immediate result of various groups working together on this 
project was to make young people aware of those whose lives were 
directly touched by World War II. Many of the local youth had no idea 
that they were living next door to people who had first-hand knowledge 
of this historic event. Grandchildren were talking to grandparents and 
asking questions about the war. Many teens were surprised to learn that 
some of those serving in the armed services were no older than their 
big brothers or themselves. During the celebration, those who had 
contributed their possessions from that period stood by their displays, 
ready to describe each artifact.
  These types of activities help us remember our history, the 
individual sacrifices that were made for freedom, how individuals coped 
with difficult times, and how America emerged stronger. Understanding 
this legacy through these types of exhibits is a worthwhile pursuit.
  The traveling exhibits that I have described today are in keeping 
with the goal of bringing our historical and cultural heritage to areas 
that would not otherwise have the opportunity. Much of the criticism of 
the NEA has been anecdotal and has painted an ugly picture. Utah's 
story is anything but. The state arts and humanities councils, assisted 
by the National Endowments, and the Smithsonian, has demonstrated how 
arts and humanities can be a positive influence in our communities.
  Mr. President, I believe a continued federal arts and humanities 
partnership is worthwhile, and encourage my colleagues to support a 
small increase.
  I would also like to thank Chairman Gorton for his leadership on this 
bill. He has had to balance several competing priorities and has done 
an admirable job. I appreciate very much his attention to the details 
of so many important issues.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, one of the most important provisions in 
this bill is its support for the National Endowments for the Arts and 
Humanities. These agencies provide essential Federal support for 
cultural activities in communities across America. The arts and 
humanities are a central part of our democracy, our history and our 
heritage and they eminently deserve this federal support.
  It is important for the federal government to create an environment 
which supports the arts and humanities in our nation. The Endowments 
have done an outstanding job in providing this needed support. They 
have provided assistance to theaters, museums, dance companies, and a 
wide range of cultural activities in communities and neighborhoods in 
every state.
  The federal role is not an isolated one. It functions in partnership 
with local and state governments and the private sector. Across the 
country, mayors have been among the strongest supporters of the arts, 
because they know that a strong cultural community attracts families 
and businesses to our cities. Cultural tourism is a growth industry in 
states throughout the country.
  Federal support provides needed assistance to cultural institutions, 
and it also provides critical support in schools. Today's schools face 
a broad range of challenges, and a compelling body of research 
demonstrates a strong correlation between study of the arts and 
academic achievement. The arts are ``the Fourth R,'' and they deserve 
to have a significant role in the educational experience of all 
children.
  In 1998, students with course work in music scored 52 points higher 
on the verbal portion and 36 points higher on the math portion of the 
SAT. With results like these, it is clear that we should find effective 
ways to integrate arts education into the classroom curriculum so that 
music, painting, drama and other arts can enrich the educational 
experience of all students.
  The Endowments have often been the subject of criticism over the last 
several years. But Congress has imposed reforms that have virtually 
eliminated controversy over grant awards.
  The Arts Endowment has worked hard to improve its operations and to 
respond to the concerns expressed by members of Congress. Its current 
chair, Bill Ivey, has proposed a major new initiative, Challenge 
America, that will emphasize outreach projects for education, including 
after-school programs involving the arts, historic preservation and 
measures to develop the arts infrastructure in communities. He has also 
implemented ``ArtsReach'' which will encourage applications and grants 
to states that have received few grants in the past.
  The Humanities Endowment has undertaken a leadership role to improve 
teacher training using the Internet and other technologies to ensure 
that new public programs in the humanities reach classrooms in as many 
communities as possible.
  These agencies are doing all that they can to expand the scope of 
cultural activities in America. It is essential that we provide them 
with the resources necessary to carry out their important mission. I 
support efforts to increase funding for the agencies, so that they can 
more fully achieve their important goals. As the statute creating the 
agencies emphasized, the United States cannot afford to limit its 
efforts to science and technology alone, but should give fair and full 
support to the other great branches of scholarly and cultural endeavors 
in our society, in order to achieve a better understanding of the past, 
a better analysis of the present, and a better vision of the future.
  I urge my colleagues to support funding for these agencies, and I 
hope that at long last we can give them the support that they have 
earned.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, on behalf of myself and Senators 
Bennett, Chafee, Kennedy, Moynihan, and Reed, I am pleased that the 
Managers of the bill have agreed to support our proposal for a funding 
increase for the National Endowment for the Arts and the National 
Endowment for the Humanities.
  First let me commend Senators Gorton and Byrd for starting this 
discussion out on the right foot. They provided modest increases for 
the NEA, NEH and IMLS under very difficult circumstances. I applaud the 
leadership they have shown in recognizing the important role that each 
of these agencies play in strengthening our nation's cultural 
institutions and expanding opportunities for participation in cultural 
activities.
  My support for these agencies runs deep because I know that the 
grants that they make have a positive impact on the state of Vermont 
and nearly all who live there. The NEA and NEH make it possible for 
more Vermonters to have access to the arts and humanities in their many 
different forms and shapes--literature, art history, dance, music, 
folkarts, history and theater.
  In number terms, the positive impact of the arts and the humanities 
is statistically significant. It can be measured in terms of increased 
academic

[[Page S10835]]

achievement and better outlook on life for those school-aged children 
that have the opportunity to participate in the arts or humanities 
experience.
  In terms of education, students of the arts outperform their ``non-
arts'' peers on the SAT. Even when one takes into consideration the 
economic status of a family, kids from low-income families that 
participate in the arts had higher grades in English, were less likely 
to drop out by grade 10, were less ``bored'' in school, had a higher 
``self concept,'' and placed a higher value on volunteerism than their 
low-income peers with low arts involvement.
  The arts have demonstrated effectiveness in making a difference for 
youth at-risk by decreasing truancy and increasing enthusiasm for 
learning. Students engaged in the learning process are less likely to 
get into trouble and the arts have proven themselves are one of our 
best tools in this effort. The hard data backs up these claims.
  In other instances, the positive impact of the arts and humanities 
can be ``measured'' by a smile that grows on the face of a person 
listening to the music of the Vermont Symphony at a free summer 
concert; it can be ``quantified'' by the deeper understanding one gains 
about storytelling and the New England folk culture thanks to programs 
sponsored by the Vermont Folklife Center; it can be ``gauged'' by a 
young person's spirit that soars to new heights from imagining worlds 
beyond their own while daydreaming at the Fairbanks Museum and 
Planetarium in St. Johnsbury.
  We must recognize and acknowledge the ways in which the arts expand 
the imagination of young people; broaden their interest in creating; 
introduce them to other worlds, other people, and other cultures; make 
learning other subjects generally more ``fun;'' and build their skills 
of cooperation that they must practice when performing a play, playing 
in a band, or singing in a choir. The NEA and NEH make these 
opportunities possible for the people of Vermont. With a little 
investigation, many of you will find that these agencies are doing the 
same in your home states.
  Because of the consideration shown by the Chairman of this 
subcommittee, each of the three agencies will be able to extend their 
grant programs more broadly. With the additional money that we are 
requesting today, NEA and NEH could further expand their outreach 
efforts with an eye towards introducing more Americans, many for the 
first time to the beauty of dance, the spectacle of theater, the 
enchantment of reading and the magic of the museum.
  We have new, visionary leaders at the NEA and NEH. Bill Ivey and Bill 
Ferris are Chairmen who have their ears to the ground and they are 
prepared to respond to the cultural needs of the people of this nation, 
regardless of where they live. They have made it their business to 
involve the grassroots. They fundamentally understand where congress is 
coming from both in terms of its support for the agencies and with 
regard to the criticisms of ``elitism'' and favoritism.
  To address concerns, they have focused on grassroots initiatives 
like: ``Challenge America,''--an effort to target grant dollars to 
communities that lack a significant arts presence and invest in arts 
education, preservation of cultural heritage and after school 
programming for young people-at-risk;
  ``Our History is America's History''--a program that will encourage 
all Americans to explore our family's history and stories, enter these 
stories to the Internet and connect these personal histories to the 
broad sweep of American and world history; and
  ``ED-sitement''--a partnership involving the NEH, MCI corporations 
and others designed to help humanities teachers use the Internet 
effectively in their teaching.
  Each of these programs better connect the local community with its 
rich and vibrant local history and cultural offerings. They draw upon 
the rich cultural heritage and traditions of a region and share those 
treasures and stories widely with our nation's community. I am anxious 
to support their efforts. It is due to their leadership and the 
leadership of my own Vermont Arts Council, Vermont Humanities Council 
and all of Vermont's museums and cultural institutions that I stand 
with confidence behind these agencies and call for a modest increase in 
their budgets.
  The National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for 
the Humanities are agencies with small budgets that provide 
extraordinary service to the people of this nation. I encourage my 
colleagues to support each of these agencies.
  In closing, I would like to applaud the leadership of my colleague 
from Mississippi, Senator Cochran for his unwavering support for the 
NEH. In addition, I would like to publicly state my support for the 
Institute for Museum Services and hope that during conference 
negotiations with the House, we will adopt the highest appropriation 
possible for that important agency.
  Finally, I would like to thank Senator Gorton and Senator Byrd for 
their leadership on this issue and thank my colleagues for supporting 
this modest increase for NEA and NEH.


                    amendment no. 1572, as modified

(Purpose: To provide funding to carry out the Urban Park and Recreation 
                 Recovery Act of 1978, with an offset)

       On page 16, line 25, strike ``$49,951,000'' and insert 
     $51,451,000, of which not less than $1,500,000 shall be 
     available to carry out the Urban Park and Recreation Recovery 
     Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.)''.
                                  ____



                    amendment no. 1573, as modified

 (Purpose: To provide funding for the Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania 
                National Military Park, with an offset)

       On page 18, line 16, strike ``$84,525,000'' and insert 
     ``$87,725,000''.
       On page 18, line 19, before the period, insert the 
     following: ``, and of which not less than $3,000,000 shall be 
     available for the Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National 
     Military Park''.
                                  ____



                    amendment no. 1575, as modified

   (Purpose: To provide funding for tribally controlled colleges and 
                             universities)

       At the appropriate place in title I, insert the following:
       Sec. 1 . (a) In addition to any amounts otherwise made 
     available under this title to carry out the Tribally 
     Controlled College or University Assistance Act of 1978, 
     $1,500,000 is appropriated to carry out such Act for fiscal 
     year 2000.
                                  ____



                     amendment no. 1578 as modified

 (Purpose: To make funds available to the Secretary of the Interior to 
     develop a pilot wildlife data system for the State of Alabama)

       On page 62, between lines 3 and 4, insert the following:

     SEC. 1.   PILOT WILDLIFE DATA SYSTEM.

       From funds made available by this Act to the U.S. Fish and 
     Wildlife Service, the Secretary of the Interior shall use 
     $1,000,000 to develop a pilot wildlife data system to provide 
     statistical data relating to wildlife management and control 
     in the State of Alabama.
                                  ____



                     amendment no. 1582 as modified

 (Purpose: To provide funding for modifications to the Franklin Delano 
                  Roosevelt Memorial, with an offset)

       On page 3, line 18, strike ``$287,305,000'' and insert 
     ``$283,805,000''.
       On page 17, line 19, strike ``$221,093,000'' and insert 
     ``$227,593,000''.
       On page 17, line 22, before the colon, insert the 
     following: ``, of which not less than $3,500,000 shall be 
     available for modifications to the Franklin Delano Roosevelt 
     Memorial''.
                                  ____



                    amendment no. 1590, as modified

       Before the period at the end of the ``Construction'' 
     account of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, insert the 
     following: ``: Provided further, That in return for a quit 
     claim deed to a school building on the Lac Courte Oreilles 
     Ojibwe Indian Reservation, the Secretary shall pay to U.K. 
     Development, LLC the amount of $375,000 from the funds made 
     available under this heading''.

  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, the amendment I am offering would compensate 
a company that built a school building for the Lac Courte Oreilles 
Tribe in my state of Wisconsin. It would also clarify ownership of the 
building. The educational program of the school, as well as the 
operation and maintenance funding are provided to the Tribe through a 
grant from the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
  When a number of classrooms were condemned, the BIA provided a grant 
to the school to lease temporary space while the classrooms were 
replaced. Rather than lease space, the Tribe entered into a lease/
purchase agreement with a contractor for construction of an 8,400 
square foot building. When the

[[Page S10836]]

Bureau learned that the Tribe had not used the initial grant payment to 
lease space, they declined to provide additional money to the tribe for 
this project since the BIA was, at the same time, providing about $2 
million for the tribe to replace the condemned classrooms. All of this 
and more is detailed in an audit report issued by Interior's Inspector 
General last March.
  It is my understanding that this amendment will have no impact on 
construction projects which are to begin in fiscal year 2000. To that 
end, I would urge the chairman to call on BIA to identify before 
conference any potential negative impact associated with this 
amendment.


                    amendment no. 1592, as modified

 (Purpose: To provide funds for the Forest Service to acquire lands at 
                            Lake Logan, NC)

       On page 65, line 18, strike ``$37,170,000'' and insert 
     ``$38,170,000''.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1597

    (Purpose: To provide an additional $4,000,000 for the National 
                     Endowment for the Humanities)

       On page 95, line 5, strike ``$97,550,000'' and insert 
     ``$101,000,000''.
       On page 95, line 13, strike ``$14,150,000'' and insert 
     ``$14,700,000''.
       On page 95, line 14, strike ``$10,150,000'' and insert 
     ``$10,700,000''.
                                  ____



                    amendment no. 1606, as modified

 (Purpose: To provide funding for the acquisition of new properties in 
      Kenweenaw National Historic Park, Michigan, with an offset)

       On page 18, line 19, before the period, insert the 
     following: ``, and of which not less than $1,700,000 shall be 
     available for the acquisition of properties in Keweenaw 
     National Historical Park, Michigan''.
                                  ____



                    amendment no. 1612, as modified

   (Purpose: To make funds available for planning and development of 
interpretive sites for the quadricentennial commemoration of the Saint 
       Croix Island International Historic site, with an offset)

       On page 17, line 22, insert the following before the colon: 
     ``and of which $90,000 shall be available for planning and 
     development of interpretive sites for the quadricentennial 
     commemoration of the Saint Croix Island International 
     Historic Site, Maine including possible interpretive sites in 
     Calais, Maine''.

  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise in support of two amendments I 
have filed in connection with the Interior appropriations bill for 
fiscal year 2000.
  My amendments, which are cosponsored by Senator Snowe, are expected 
to be accepted as part of the managers' package, which the chairman of 
the subcommittee will be sending to the desk shortly.
  I want to take this opportunity to thank the subcommittee chairman, 
Senator Gorton, and the ranking minority member, Senator Byrd, for 
their assistance and support of my proposals.
  The amendments I am proposing will provide funding and National Park 
Service support for projects of great historical and international 
significant to my State and our country. Yet probably only a few of our 
colleagues have ever heard of St. Croix Island, nestled in the St. 
Croix River that separates Maine from Canada, or this island's place in 
the history of the United States and Canada and in the hearts of North 
Americans of French descent.
  We have all probably heard of the Pilgrims' landing at Plymouth Rock 
in 1620, or the English colonial settlement at Jamestown in 1607, but 
few know the story of an even older settlement, dating back to 1604, 
when French nobleman Pierre Dugua Sieur de Mons, accompanied by a 
courageous group of adventurers that included Samuel Champlain, landed 
on St. Croix Island and quickly set about to construct a settlement. 
They cleared the island, planted crops, dug a well, and built houses, 
fortifications, public buildings, and gun emplacements. In the process, 
they were aided by Native peoples who made temporary camps on the 
island and assisted in various ways. At the same time, Samuel Champlain 
undertook a number of reconnaissance missions from the island. On one, 
he found and named Mount Desert Island, now the home to Acadia National 
Park.
  By October, the settlement was ready. But the Maine winter was more 
than the seventy-nine settlers had bargained for. By winter's end, 
nearly half had died and many others were seriously ill.
  The spring brought relief from the harsh weather. Sieur de Mons 
relocated his colony to Port Royal in what is now Nova Scotia and, in 
1608, Champlain and a company of men founded Quebec.
  According to the National Park Service, the French settlement on St. 
Croix Island in 1604 and 1605 was the first and ``most ambitious 
attempt of its time to establish an enduring French presence in the 
`New World.' '' Many view the expedition that settled on St. Croix 
Island in 1604 as the beginning of the Acadian culture in North 
America. This rich and diverse culture spread across the continent, 
from Canada to Louisiana, where French-speaking Acadians came to be 
known as ``Cajuns.''
  The rich history and cultural significance of the 1604 settlement at 
St. Croix Island are beyond question. Yet, with only four years 
remaining before the 400th anniversary of the settlement, there is 
still much to prepare for a proper and appropriate commemoration of 
this historical event.
  Let me try to put the occasion in perspective. For the 300th 
anniversary of the settlement, U.S., British, and French naval ships, 
flagged out for the occasion, steamed up the St. Croix River and 
anchored off the historic island. Speakers at the ceremony honoring the 
anniversary included the consul general of France and the famous U.S. 
general and Maine patriot, Joshua Chamberlain.
  Several thousand people attended the celebration.
  In 1996, the U.S. National Park Service and Parks Canada agreed to 
``conduct joint strategic planning for the international commemoration 
[of the St. Croix Island], with a special focus on the 400th 
anniversary of settlement in 2004.'' For its part, Parks Canada 
constructed an exhibit in New Brunswick overlooking St. Croix Island. 
The exhibit uses Champlain's first-hand accounts, period images, 
updated research, and custom artwork to tell the compelling story of 
the settlement.
  The National Park Service, on the other hand, has plans to expand a 
small, existing site located just south of Calais, Maine. The Park 
Service plan envisions a modest, but appropriate outdoor exhibit 
overlooking St. Croix Island and exhibits in an indoor visitor center, 
preferably located in nearby Calais. These plans are intended to 
commemorate in an appropriate way one of only two international 
historic sites in the U.S. national park system and, as far as they go, 
the plans are a welcome first step. The next steps have yet to be taken 
and time is growing short. That is why I offered two amendments to this 
appropriations bill.
  The first amendment makes $90,000 available in FY 2000 to finish pre-
construction planning for and begin development of the outdoor site at 
Red Beach and to plan for the possible location of interpretive 
exhibits in Calais, Maine. Currently, no money is scheduled to be 
appropriated for the Red Beach site until FY 2002, and National Park 
Service officials in Maine and in the Northeast Regional Office agree 
with me that the funding schedule provides for too little too late. 
This money is needed now in order to ensure that the project is 
completed in time for the 400th anniversary celebration.
  My second amendment asks the National Park Service to work with the 
people of Calais to make an indoor visitors center--known as the 
``Downeast Heritage Center--a reality. The people of Calais and 
surrounding areas have worked tirelessly to move the project towards 
completion. They need the assistance of the National Park Service--
which already has endorsed the concept--but which now must help with 
planning and financial assistance to bring the project from a dream to 
reality. My amendment asks and directs the Park Service to work with 
the people of Calais on this project and to ensure that appropriate 
exhibits are completed in time for the 400th anniversary celebration.
  I further request that the Park Service include in its fiscal year 
2001 budget submission funds for both the Red Beach site and the 
Downeast Heritage Center in downtown Calais.
  My amendments seeks only a small commitment of funds that are 
designed to commemorate a 1604 settlement of enormous historical 
significance.
  I again want to thank Senator Gorton and Senator Byrd for their 
assistance in helping our country prepare for a terrific 400th 
anniversary celebration of the early French settlement at St. Croix 
Island.

[[Page S10837]]

  I yield the floor.


                    amendment no. 1615, as modified

       On page 76, between lines 18 and 19, insert the following:
       ``The Forest Service is authorized through the Forest 
     Service existing budget to reimburse Harry Fray for the cost 
     of his home, $143,406 (1997 dollars) destroyed by arson on 
     June 21, 1990 in retaliation for his work with the Forest 
     Service.''
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1637

   (Purpose: To provide funds to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
 Resource Management account for grants under the Great Lakes Fish and 
     Wildlife Restoration Program and for spartina grass research)

       On page 10, line 15, strike ``$683,519,000'' and insert 
     ``$684,019,000''.
       On page 10, line 16, after ``herein,'' insert the 
     following: ``of which $400,000 shall be available for grants 
     under the Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration Program, 
     and of which $300,000 shall be available for spartina grass 
     research being conducted by the University of Washington, 
     and''.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1638

(Purpose: To increase funding for weatherization assistance grants and 
           state energy conservation grants, with an offset)

       On page 78, line 16, strike ``$682,817,000'' and insert 
     ``$684,817,000''.
       On page 78, line 19, strike ``$166,000,000'' and insert 
     ``$168,000,000''.
       On page 78, line 24, strike ``$133,000,000'' and insert 
     ``$135,000,000''.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1639

      (Purpose: To set aside funding for development of a habitat 
   conservation plan for cold water fish in the States of Idaho and 
                                Montana)

       On page 10, line 16, after ``herein,'' insert ``of which 
     $500,000 of the amount available for consultation shall be 
     available for development of a voluntary-enrollment habitat 
     conservation plan for cold water fish in cooperation with the 
     States of Idaho and Montana (of which $250,000 shall be made 
     available to each of the States of Idaho and Montana), and''.

  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise to support the amendment proposed 
by Senator Crapo, along with myself, Senator Burns, and Senator Craig, 
to provide funding for the development of a habitat conservation plan 
for the recovery of the bull trout and other cold water fish in Montana 
and Idaho.
  By way of background, the bull trout favors cold, high-mountain 
streams with lots of cover. Some are resident, remaining in the same 
tributary all year round. Most, however, are migratory, heading 
upstream spawn in the spring, when the water starts to get warm.
  Historically, bull trout were found throughout the Northwest, from 
California to the Yukon Territory. Today, they are found primarily in 
Idaho and Montana. The Montana population is located in the Clark Fork 
River and in Lake Kookanusa, above the Libby Dam.
  There are many reasons for the decline in the bull trout population, 
including timber harvesting, road building, farming and grazing, and 
dam construction. Ironically, efforts to help recover various salmon 
species in the lower part of the Columbia River system may actually 
have harmed the bull trout in the upper part of the system, by reducing 
water levels in the upper reservoirs.
  In any event, in 1998, the Fish and Wildlife Service listed the bull 
trout as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act.
  For years, the State of Montana has been working hard to recover the 
bull trout. This work has intensified since the listing. For example, 
last year, Montana spent $568,000 on recovery efforts: things like 
improving stream channels, stabilizing stream banks, fencing, 
monitoring, educating anglers, and preventing poaching. But, to get the 
job done, we need to do more. And we need more help from the Fish and 
Wildlife Service.
  The amendment that we are offering today takes an important 
additional step. It sets aside $500,000, from the Fish and Wildlife 
Service budget, to help the states of Montana and Idaho develop a 
voluntary habitat conservation plan for the bull trout and other cold 
water fish, including the westslope cutthroat trout, for which a 
listing petition has been filed.
  The idea of the HCP is to provide guidance, to small landowners, 
particularly owners of woodlots, farms, and ranches. For example, the 
HCP might set standards re-channelizing streams. Or for timber 
harvesting and road building to prevent sedimentation. Compliance will 
be completely voluntary, but landowners who follow the guidance will 
know that they are in full compliance with the Endangered Species Act.
  This can encourage the kind of voluntary, cooperative efforts that 
can go a long way towards recovering the bull trout. Let me give you an 
example. A few years ago, I spent the day at the Foote Ranch, along the 
Blackfoot River, in Ovando, in Northwest Montana. Geoff Foote and 
others were restoring Bull Trout habitat. Years ago, a stream had been 
straightened. This had the indirect effect of reducing the amount of 
mud that gathered along the sides of the stream, where bull trout 
spawn. So Geoff and others were re-channelizing the stream.
  We cut logs, hauled them by horse, and placed the logs and large 
rocks so that the stream would meander and, by doing so, provide better 
bull spawning habitat.
  It was a cooperative effort, involving folks from the Fish and 
Wildlife Service, the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, 
local farmers and ranchers, and members of local environmental 
organizations. Our amendment will encourage further efforts, along 
these same lines.
  The amendment does not modify the substantive provisions of the 
Endangered Species Act in any way. Nor does it implicate any of the 
controversies surrounding the standards for HCPs.
  But it does provide funding to help Montana and Idaho continue their 
work to recover the bull trout. That's important, in it's own right.
  Moreover, it will help our State highway programs. The listing of the 
bull trout has caused concern about the potential effect on highway 
construction. By providing clear guidance, the HCP should go a long way 
to ensuring that the bull trout and our highway programs both can 
thrive.
  I commend the sponsor of the amendment, Senator Crapo, the Chairman 
of the Fisheries, Wildlife, and Drinking Water Subcommittee of the 
Environment and Public Works Committee, for his leadership on this 
issue. I also commend the other members of the delegation, Senators 
Burns and Craig. I look forward to working further with them, Governors 
Racicot and Kempthorne, and Fish and Wildlife Service Director Clark to 
help recover the bull trout in Montana and Idaho in a reasonable, 
responsible way.


                           amendment no. 1640

(Purpose: To increase funding for Post Secondary Schools funded by the 
           Bureau of Indian Affairs, and for other purposes)

       On page 27, line 22, strike ``$1,631,996,000'' and insert 
     ``$1,632,596,000''.
       On page 29, line 10, after ``2002'' insert ``: Provided 
     further, That from amounts appropriated under this heading 
     $5,422,000 shall be made available to the Southwestern Indian 
     Polytechnic Institute and that from amounts appropriated 
     under this heading $8,611,000 shall be made available to 
     Haskell Indian Nations University''.
       On page 62, between lines 3 and 4, insert the following:

     SEC. ______. BIA POST SECONDARY SCHOOLS FUNDING FORMULA.

       (a) In General.--Any funds appropriated for Bureau of 
     Indian Affairs Operations for Central Office Operations for 
     Post Secondary Schools for any fiscal year that exceed the 
     amount appropriated for the schools for fiscal year 2000 
     shall be allocated among the schools proportionate to the 
     unmet need of the schools as determined by the Post Secondary 
     Funding Formula adopted by the Office of Indian Education 
     Programs and the schools on May 13, 1999.
       (b) Applicability.--This section shall apply for fiscal 
     year 2000 and each succeeding fiscal year.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1641

 (Purpose: To direct the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of 
the Interior to increase the number of youth employed during the summer 
                  to accomplish conservation projects)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following new section:

     SEC.  . YOUTH CONSERVATION CORPS AND RELATED PARTNERSHIPS.

       (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, there 
     shall be available for high priority projects which shall be 
     carried out by the Youth Conservation Corps as authorized by 
     Public Law 91-378, or related partnerships with non-Federal 
     youth conservation corps or entities such as the Student 
     Conservation Association, in order to increase the number of 
     summer jobs available for youth, ages 15 through 22, on 
     Federal lands:
       (3) $4,000,000 of the funds available to the Forest Service 
     under this Act; and
       (4) *** of the funds available to the Bureau of Land 
     Management under this Act.
       (b) Within six months after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the 
     Interior

[[Page S10838]]

     shall jointly submit a report to the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations and the Committee on Energy and 
     Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on 
     Resources of the House of Representatives that includes the 
     following:
       (i) the number of youth, ages 15 through 22, employed 
     during the summer of 1999, and the number estimated to be 
     employed during the summer of 2000, through the Youth 
     Conservation Corp, the Public Land Corps, or a related 
     partnership with a State, local, or non-profit youth 
     conservation corps or other entity such as the Student 
     Conservation Association;
       (ii) a description of the different types of work 
     accomplished by youth during the summer of 1999;
       (iii) identification of an problems that prevent or limit 
     the use of the Youth Conservation Corps, the Public Land 
     Corps, or related partnerships to accomplish projects 
     described in subsection (a);
       (iv) recommendations to improve the use and effectiveness 
     of partnerships described in subsection (a); and
       (v) and analysis of the maintenance backlog that identifies 
     the types of projects that the Youth Conservation Corps, the 
     Public Land Corps, or related partnerships are qualified to 
     complete.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1642

   (Purpose: To increase funding for payments in lieu of taxes, with 
                                offsets)

       On page 5, line 13, strike ``$130,000,000,'' and insert 
     ``$135,000,000''.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1643

  Purpose: To provide funds for the land and water conservation fund 
                    stateside program, with offsets.

       On page 18, line 19, strike ``program.'' and insert 
     ``program, and in addition $20,000,000 shall be available to 
     provide financial assistance to States and shall be derived 
     from the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to offer an amendment with 
Senator Lautenberg and 25 other Senators to provide $20 million for the 
stateside Land and Water Conservation Fund or LWCF matching grant 
program.
  Too often we forget that--in addition to a National Park System--we 
have national system of parks which includes tens of thousands of State 
and local parks. More than 37,000 of these State and local parks and 
recreation facilities have received a stateside LWCF matching grant, 
but there is a problem. The stateside LWCF program has been shut down 
because Congress hasn't funded it. Yet O.C.S. revenues currently are at 
$4 billion.
  Over 30 years ago, in a bipartisan effort, Congress created the Land 
and Water Conservation Fund. The LWCF is funded with Federal revenues 
from off-shore oil and gas leasing which now exceed $4 billion a year. 
LWCF money can be used for two purposes:
  (1) Acquisition of land by the four Federal land management agencies; 
and (2) matching grants to State and local governments for recreation 
facilities, parks, playgrounds, and campgrounds. The LWCF Act envisions 
a balance: between the Federal and State and local parks; between the 
needs of rural and urban populations; and between easterners and 
westerners.
  Mr. President, I now want to refer to a ``LWCF Authorization/
Appropriation'' chart. As this chart shows, the balance has been lost. 
FY1995 was the last year the LWCF stateside matching grant program was 
funded. In that year, over $600 million was requested and only $25 
million was appropriated. Despite the past successes and growing 
demand, Washington pulled the rug out from under the stateside program. 
Four years ago, Congress and the administration zeroed out the 
stateside program. That was a serious mistake. Washington was being 
penny-wise and pound foolish. The promise to Americans set forth in the 
LWCF Act was broken.
  When the offshore oil leasing program began, a portion of the 
receipts were pledged to recreation and conservation of America's great 
outdoors. I see no reason not to meet that pledge. I see many reasons 
to keep it. As the chart shows, 2 years ago was a record year for 
the Land and Water Conservation Fund when over $900 million was 
appropriated. Out of the total, the Senate appropriated $100 million 
for the stateside matching grant program.

  Unfortunately, the good work of the Senate went for naught. This 
money was lost in conference. None of this money went to the stateside 
grant program. Every appropriated dollar went to Federal land 
acquisition and maintenance of Federal land.
  This year the mistake of closing down this program is being 
recognized. The administration requested $150 million for a State land 
conservation grants program and $50 million for open space planning 
grants to States and local governments as part of their Lands Legacy 
proposal. As Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources 
Committee, I had to oppose the administration's proposal because these 
programs are not authorized by the LWCF Act.
  The President's Land Legacy proposal sought to fundamentally 
restructure the stateside matching grant program authorized by the LWCF 
Act. The LWCF stateside program is a formula grant program which 
provides monies to State and local communities for the planning, 
acquisition, and development of parks and recreation facilities. The 
President proposed to replace this program with a competitive grant 
program to the States for the purchase of land and open space planning. 
This proposal would have changed the focus of the stateside program and 
undercut the federalism inherent in the existing program.
  Nonetheless, I was encouraged that the President, after 4 years, 
recognized the importance of sharing LWCF moneys with State and local 
governments. More progress in restoring stateside was made last month 
when the House appropriated $30 million for the program.
  With this amendment, the Senate is doing its part. With tough budget 
targets, it was not easy to find $20 million in such a lean bill; 
however, we were able to find offsets from a variety of programs. These 
are difficult choices, but well worth it.
  I wish we could have provided more money for this important program. 
However, it is a start. I will do all I can do to ensure that in 
conference the Senate recede to the House and provide $30 million for 
the stateside matching grant program. I also will continue to seek 
permanent funding for this program so that we do not have to fight this 
annual appropriations battle.
  Our system of government works best when all levels of government 
work together with the private sector to pursue shared goals. Few goals 
are as worthy as recreation for families and communities. Recreation is 
not a child's play. It is more than a hobby. It is a necessary 
component of our lives. It boosts the economy. It helps build stronger 
families and communities. And it encourages conservation efforts and 
helps preserve open space.
  So why deny communities matching funds for recreation from proceeds 
of our offshore leasing program? I support offshore leasing and the use 
of some proceeds for stateside LWCF matching grants to State and local 
governments.
  This amendment gives us a good reason to focus on the value of 
recreation to our lives and how we can do a better job encouraging 
people of all ages to enjoy America's natural splendor. Trips to 
national parks are remembered for a lifetime, but most day-to-day 
recreation takes place close to home and demand for local recreation 
resources is high and increasing. We must restore the LWCF stateside 
program; it is a good investment. This amendment is a start.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the 
amendment to the Interior Appropriations bill that I am offering with 
my colleague from Alaska, Mr. Murkowski.
  I would like to thank our broad range of bipartisan cosponsors: 
Senators Boxer, Chafee, Dodd, Roth, Sessions, Feingold, Kerry of 
Massachusetts, Leahy, Landrieu, Lincoln, Frist, Graham, Collins, Smith 
of New Hampshire, Gregg, Moynihan, Warner, Bayh, McCain, Akaka, 
Feinstein, Jeffords, and Hagel.
  Mr. President, this amendment would restore funds to a program that 
has helped protect open space in every State in the Nation through the 
State grants section of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. This 
amendment restores $20 million in fiscal year 2000 for these matching 
grants to States.
  This ``Stateside'' program can be used to fund a variety of public 
open space efforts, including State and county parks, State forests, 
boating and swimming areas, and a variety of other recreational sites.
  Mr. President, the House of Representatives saw fit to include the 
program at $30 million in its Interior Appropriations bill.

[[Page S10839]]

  We hope to come to their level in conference after our initial 
funding at $20 million.
  Over the past 30 years, through the stateside program, over $3 
billion has been provided to the States, and through them, to local 
governments, on a matching basis, to preserve approximately 37,000 park 
and recreation areas.
  Mr. President, the decision to fund open space programs through the 
Land and Water Conservation Fund is one of the wisest investments we 
can make. Open spaces are more than just undeveloped land. We all know 
that protecting open spaces can guard sensitive drinking water supplies 
and preserve wildlife habitat.
  Open spaces are also a lasting legacy we pass on to our children and 
grandchildren.
  But there is another equally important benefit of open spaces.
  In my State of New Jersey--the most densely populated State in the 
Nation--open spaces provide working families of limited means a place 
to enjoy the outdoors at little or no cost. A day at the beach or a 
picnic in the park or a hike in the woods is a day well spent.
  Mr. President, open space is extremely valuable in my State. In a 
poll last year by Quinnipiac College published in the Newark Star-
Ledger, 70 percent of New Jersey residents said that preserving open 
space and farmland is more important than commercial growth and 
development in rural areas.
  Mr. President, it is extremely gratifying when members of both 
parties can join together in support of a program that has provided 
untold benefits for millions of Americans. I want to thank Senator 
Murkowski and my other colleagues who support this amendment. I ask all 
of my colleagues to join us to preserve open space for America's 
families.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I am extremely pleased to cosponsor the 
bipartisan amendment, offered by my colleague from Alaska, regarding 
the Land and Water Conservation Fund. The amendment provides $20 
million for matching grants to States under the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund, which, for almost 30 years, had enabled small 
communities throughout the Nation to establish local parks, build 
sports fields, acquire green ways and trails, and support community 
gardens.
  The stateside program under the LWCF is a worthwhile conservation 
program that for too long has been without any funding at all. It has 
received nothing since 1995, and States have been strapped to find 
money for their own conservation efforts without any Federal 
assistance. As pressures for development and sprawl increase in many 
parts of the Nation, it is more important than ever to help States 
protect the open and green spaces that are crucial for a healthy 
community.
  And with the recent ballot initiatives to promote conservation that 
have been approved by voters across the Nation, States now have money 
available to match Federal dollars through the stateside program. It is 
now up to Congress to make the Federal money available. For those who 
criticize the program as a form of pork, let me stress that States must 
put up 50 percent of the money for their projects. This is not a hand-
out. This is a fiscally sound program that makes land and water 
conservation for thousands of small communities around the country a 
national priority.
  The stateside program has been supported by mayors, county officials, 
governors, civic associations, outdoor recreation groups, land 
conservancy groups, conservation groups--the list goes on and on.
  I add myself to that list as a strong proponent of the LWCF, 
including the stateside program. The Federal Government, in my opinion, 
plays a vital role in assisting State and local governments establish 
local parks and protect open and green space. Indeed, when I was 
Governor of Rhode Island, I started the Green Acres Program in 1964 for 
this purpose, and the Federal Government matched some of the money to 
help get the program going.
  Earlier this year, Senator Leahy and I circulated a letter to our 
fellow Senators, asking them to support full funding for the LWCF. 
Thirty-six of our colleagues in the Senate endorsed that letter and 
signed it. What a tremendous showing of bipartisan support!
  I am very pleased that the managers of the bill have agreed to this 
amendment.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am pleased to join the Senator from 
Alaska, Mr. Murkowski, and the Senator from New Jersey, Mr. Lautenberg, 
in offering this important bipartisan amendment to provide much needed 
funding for the stateside program of the Land and Water Conservation 
Fund.
  Additional co-sponsors include Senators Chafee, Roth, Dodd, Landrieu, 
Sessions, Feingold, Lincoln, Leahy, Frist, Kerry, Graham, Collins, 
Smith of New Hampshire, Gregg, Moynihan, Warner, Bayh, McCain, Akaka, 
Feinstein, Jeffords, and Hagel.
  The stateside program has, once again (since fiscal year 1995) been 
zeroed-out. Our amendment provides $20 million for this popular 
program.
  As the 21st century approaches, we must renew our commitment to our 
natural heritage. That commitment must go beyond a piecemeal approach. 
It must be a comprehensive, long-term strategy to ensure that when our 
children's children enter the 22d century, they can herald our actions 
today, as we revere those of President Roosevelt.
  And preservation in the 21st century goes beyond protection of such 
wonders as Yosemite and Yellowstone. It must include an urban park in 
East Los Angeles where children can play basketball, a farm in Tulare 
County that can continue to grow oranges or a historic building in 
Orange County that can be restored.
  Today, our natural heritage is disappearing at an alarming rate. Each 
year, nearly 3 million acres of farmland and more than 170,000 acres of 
wetlands disappear. Each day, over 7,000 acres of open space are lost 
forever.
  Across America, parks are closing, recreational facilities 
deteriorating, open spaces vanishing, historic structures crumbling.
  Why is this happening? Because there is no dedicated funding source 
for all these noble purposes--a source which can be used only for these 
noble purposes.
  I have offered a comprehensive bill--Resources 2000--that provides 
the most sweeping commitment to protecting America's natural heritage 
in more than 30 years. It will establish a dedicated funding source for 
resource protection.
  But until such legislation is enacted, we must do what we can to fund 
these important programs now. This amendment does just that.
  This amendment will provide $20 million for the stateside portion of 
the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
  This is an important amendment for the future of our local 
communities, our quality of life, the recreational opportunities of our 
families and the preservation of our important lands.
  The Land and Water Conservation Fund is a fund that was developed out 
of a bargain between the development of the offshore oil and the 
preservation of nonrenewable assets in our communities and throughout 
our Nation.
  Since 1965, we have appropriated some $3 billion to local 
governments, States and local governments, to help them protect and 
conserve these assets. States and local governments have matched that 
with an additional $3 billion. That match tells us the kind of priority 
that our local communities place upon this program.

  Unfortunately, in 1995 it all stopped and Congress failed to 
appropriate money for the program. One of the most successful programs 
that we have at the Federal level stopped. Since that time, if had 
provided the money that this program was truly entitled to, there would 
have been an additional $2.5 billion that would have then been matched 
by another $2.5 billion in non-federal dollars. That would be $5 
billion going toward improving quality of life and protecting and 
conserving natural resources based upon the priorities of those local 
communities.
  Mr. President, every state across the Nation benefits from this 
program. I have here a book put together by the National Recreation and 
Park Association listing hundreds of projects in every state that are 
in dire need of this funding.
  In my State of California, we have used stateside funding to team up 
with local sponsors to purchase areas of

[[Page S10840]]

Redwoods State Park, the Santa Monica Mountains, Lake Tahoe and San 
Deguito Park. But there is still more that needs to be done.
  One project that I requested funding for this year is the Urban 
Nature Center and Sanctuary in Ernest Debs Park in Los Angeles. This 
Park would provide nature experiences for some of the city's most 
underserved children and their families.
  The National Audubon Society in cooperation with the City of Los 
Angeles, is developing a model Urban Nature Center in Ernest Debs 
Regional Park in Northeast Los Angeles. This surprisingly natural, 195-
acre site, run by the City's Recreation and Parks Department, is five 
miles northeast of downtown Los Angeles. It rises above some of the 
city's densest urban neighborhoods, yet is home to more than 80 species 
of birds and other wildlife. Within two miles of the park, there are 
more than 30,000 children, mostly Latino, attending school for whom the 
park and the nature center could be a giant outdoor classroom.
  The Nature Center is an exciting opportunity to bring together 
Audubon's traditional sources of support for conservation education 
with city, state and federal funds for parks, trails and habitat 
restoration. For its part in this innovative public/private 
partnership, the City of Los Angeles will dedicate $1 million in 
existing County bond funds for habitat enhancement. The Audubon Society 
is dedicated to raising $4 million in private contributions. I 
requested $1 million for the federal contribution for this project, but 
nothing was provided.
  Mr. President, this is the kind-of thing we are always pushing for--
federal/non-federal, public/private collaboration on important 
projects. And while others are contributing their share, the federal 
government is doing nothing. This must change.
  Mr. President, this amendment is a small step toward fulfilling our 
commitment to the Land and Water Conservation Fund. I urge my 
colleagues to support this amendment.


                           amendment no. 1644

 (Purpose: To provide for increased funding of certain programs of the 
 Smithsonian Institution and the Indian Health Service, with an offset 
                       for National Park Service)

       S. 1292 is amended by the following:
       On page 17, line 19, strike ``$221,093,000'' and insert in 
     lieu thereof ``$216,153,000''.
       On page 82, line 13, strike ``$2,135,561,000'' and insert 
     in lieu thereof ``$2,138,001,000''.
       On page 90, line 3, strike ``$364,562,000'' and insert in 
     lieu thereof ``$367,062,000.''
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1645

       On page 78, line 17, insert after the comma ``of which $1.6 
     million shall be for grants to municipal governments for 
     cost-shared research projects in buildings, municipal 
     processes, transportation and sustainable urban energy 
     systems, and''.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1646

   (Purpose: To provide funding for Wheeling National Heritage Area)

       On page 17, line 22, strike ``$4,000,000'' and insert 
     ``$5,000,000''.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1647

 (Purpose: Provide funding for an environmental impact statement to be 
prepared by the Forest Service, as mandated by the 9th Circuit Court of 
                                Appeals)

       On page 63, line 6, strike the period and insert in lieu 
     thereof the following: ``: Provided, That of the amount 
     provided under this heading, $750,000 shall be used for a 
     supplemental environmental impact statement for the Forest 
     Service/Weyerhaeuser Huckleberry land exchange, which shall 
     be completed by September 30, 2000.''
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1648

   (Purpose: To strike section 129 in its entirety and replace with 
 language that directs a review of possible alternatives to the Weber 
Dam on the Walker River Paiute Reservation in Nevada without requiring 
   completion of an Environmental Impact Statement. The new language 
  directs $200,000 to complete the review. This amendment retains the 
$125,000 for an analysis of the feasibility of establishing a Tribally 
  operated Lahontan Cutthroat trout fish hatchery on the Walker River 
within the Reservation, but identifies a different source for funding. 
  $175,000 of the funds appropriated in this amendment shall be made 
     available through a corresponding reduction in Bureau of Land 
  Management Wildland Fire Management Account. $150,000 of the funds 
   appropriated in this amendment shall be made available through a 
 corresponding reduction in the Water Resources Investigations Program 
   of the U.S. Geological Service. Within this program, $250,000 was 
  directed for hydrologic monitoring to support implementation of the 
Truckee River Water Quality Settlement Agreement (Senate Report 106-99, 
page 43), and $150,000 was directed to complete an endocrine disruption 
   study in the Las Vegas Wash (Senate Report 106-99, page 43). This 
 amendment would reduce the Truckee River item by $100,000 and the Las 
           Vegas Wash endocrine disruption study by $50,000)

       Starting on page 60, line 20 and continuing through page 
     62, line 3, strike SEC. 129 in its entirety and insert:
       ``Sec. 129. Walker River Basin.--$200,000 is appropriated 
     to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in FY 2000 to be used 
     through a contract or memorandum of understanding with the 
     Bureau of Reclamation, for: (1) the investigation of 
     alternatives, and if appropriate, the implementation of one 
     or more of the alternatives, to the modification of Weber Dam 
     on the Walker River Paiute Reservation in Nevada; (2) an 
     evaluation of the feasibility and effectiveness of the 
     installation of a fish ladder at Weber Dam; and (3) an 
     evaluation of opportunities for Lahontan Cutthroat Trout 
     restoration in the Walker River Basin. $125,000 is 
     appropriated to the Bureau of Indian Affairs in Fiscal Year 
     2000 for the benefit of the Walker River Paiute Tribe, in 
     recognition of the negative effects on the Tribe associated 
     with delay in modification of Weber Dam, for an analysis of 
     the feasibility of establishing a Tribally-operated Lahontan 
     cutthroat trout hatchery on the Walker River as it flows 
     through the Walker River Indian Reservation: Provided, That 
     for the purposes of this section: (i) $100,000 shall be 
     transferred from the $250,000 allocated for the U.S. 
     Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations, Truckee 
     River Water Quality Settlement Agreement; (ii) $50,000 shall 
     be transferred from the $150,000 allocated for the U.S. 
     Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations, Las Vegas 
     Wash endocrine disruption study; and (iii) $175,000 shall be 
     transferred from the funds allocated for the Bureau of Land 
     Management, Wildland Fire Management.''
                                  ____



                           AMENDMENT NO. 1649

 (Purpose: To provide funds for timber pipeline supply on the Tongass 
                            National Forest)

       On page 76, line 12 of the bill, insert the following 
     before the paragraph beginning with the word ``Of'': ``From 
     any unobligated balances available at the start of fiscal 
     year 2000, the amount of $11,550,000 shall be allocated to 
     the Alaska Region, in addition to the funds appropriated to 
     sell timber in the Alaska Region under this Act, for expenses 
     directly related to preparing sufficient additional timber 
     for sale in the Alaska Region to establish a three year 
     timber supply.''
                                  ____



                           AMENDMENT NO. 1650

     (Purpose: To set aside funding for a feasibility study on the 
  preservation of certain Civil War battlefields along the Vicksburg 
                            Campaign Trail)

       On page 17, line 22, insert before the colon the following: 
     ``, and of which not less than $1,000,000 shall be available, 
     subject to an Act of authorization, to conduct a feasibility 
     study on the preservation of certain Civil War battlefields 
     along the Vicksburg Campaign Trail, and''.
                                  ____



                           AMENDMENT NO. 1651

       At the end of Title I, insert the following:
       Sec.   . Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in 
     conveying the Twin Cities Research Center under the authority 
     provided by Public Law 104-14, as amended by Public Law 104-
     208, the Secretary may accept and retain land and other forms 
     of reimbursement: Provided, That the Secretary may retain and 
     use any such reimbursement until expended and without further 
     appropriation: (1) for the benefit of the National Wildlife 
     Refuge System within the State of Minnesota; and (2) for all 
     activities authorized by Public Law 100-696, U.S.C., 460zz.
                                  ____



                           AMENDMENT NO. 1652

       On page 13, line 9, after the word ``expended'' include: 
     ``of which not to exceed $1,000,000 shall be available to the 
     Boyer Chute National Wildlife Refuge for land acquisition.''
       On page 13, line 8, strike ``$55,244,000'' and insert 
     ``56,244,000''.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1653

       On page 17, line 22 insert before the colon the following: 
     ``, of which $500,000 shall be available for the Wilson's 
     Creek National Battlefield,''.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1654

       On page 18, line 19 before the period insert the following: 
     ``and of which $200,000 shall be available for the 
     acquisition of lands at Fort Sumter National Monument''.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1655

       On page 10, line 16, after ``herein,'' insert ``of which 
     $150,000 shall be available to Michigan State University 
     toward creation of a community development database, and''.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1656

       On page 24, at the end of line 10 insert the following 
     before the colon: ``Provided further, That not to exceed 
     $198,000 shall be available to carry out the requirements of 
     Section 215(b)(2) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1999''.
                                  ____



                           amendment no. 1657

       At the end of Title III of the bill, add the following:
       ``Sec.   . Each amount of budget authority for the fiscal 
     year ending September 30, 2000,

[[Page S10841]]

     provided in this Act for payments not required by law, is 
     hereby reduced by .34 percent: Provided, That such reductions 
     shall be applied ratably to each account, program, activity, 
     and project provided for in this Act.''


                           Amendment No. 1359

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, finally, I ask unanimous consent that the 
pending technical amendment No. 1359 be adopted and the motion to 
reconsider be laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment (No. 1359) was agreed to.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote on the last 
set of collective amendments, and I move to lay that motion on the 
table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


          preservation of fossils collected from public lands

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, last year I worked closely with my 
colleagues Senator Byrd and Senator Gorton to place language in the 
report accompanying the Fiscal Year 1999 Department of Interior 
appropriations bill directing the Secretary to report to Congress on 
the need for a uniform federal policy guiding the collection of fossils 
from public lands. This was an important step that was long overdue.
  Public lands such as those administered by the Forest Service, Bureau 
of Land Management and other agencies are some of our nation's finest 
repositories of fossils. By studying fossils, paleontologists learn 
information that is vital to understanding the Earth and the history of 
life on this planet. Unfortunately, the variety of policies used by 
federal agencies to guide the collection of fossils from these lands 
are confusing to the public, do not ensure that scientists have a full 
opportunity to study valuable specimens, and do not ensure that fossils 
are adequately preserved for the future. I believe it is time that we 
developed such a policy and implemented measures to maximize access to 
and preservation of important fossil specimens.
  I am very pleased that the Department has undertaken a serious review 
of this issue and is consulting with all stakeholders to ensure that it 
provides Congress with the best information and recommendations 
possible. It is my hope that this report will be completed 
expeditiously so that we can work with the administration on any 
follow-up measures that may be required.
  In the meantime, it is my hope that the administration will move 
forward with one important way that it can immediately make fossils 
more readily available to the public. New information technology has 
given us the ability to send vast amounts of data anywhere in the world 
almost instantaneously. I believe the administration should begin 
immediately to explore ways to utilize this capability to make data 
about critical fossils available to scientists worldwide. For example, 
the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology has the capability to 
use CT scans to create high-resolution, three-dimensional images of a 
fossil and its internal structure that can be accessed by scientists 
over the next generation Internet. I strongly urge the administration 
to fund initiatives of this type in its fiscal year 2001 budget, and to 
move forward as quickly as possible with steps that can improve public 
access to these fossils.
  Mr. GORTON. I agree with the Senator from South Dakota that it is 
important that the Secretary complete this study expeditiously and 
explore ways to use information technology to maximize the ability of 
paleontologists to study scientifically significant fossils.
  Mr. BYRD. I also agree with the Minority Leader. The Department of 
the Interior should provide the results of its analysis to Congress 
quickly and support funding for initiatives that will use new 
technology to make important scientific data available.


        pilot program for tribal priority allocation in the bia

  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, the Tribal Priority Allocation (TPA) 
Program of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) has been an issue of 
controversy for several years. For next year, the Senate Interior 
appropriations bill provides $693 million for TPA. This money is used 
by local tribal governments to operate a wide range of programs like 
public safety, resources management, education, economic development, 
and human services.
  Many tribes are not able to relate TPA funds to their own tribal 
needs with any specificity. As a result, the BIA simply does not know, 
and is not able to relate TPA spending to actual tribal needs. We are 
not saying that tribes misuse these funds. We are saying that there is 
precious little information about how TPA funds are directed toward 
tribal needs as determined by the tribes themselves.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I concur with this observation about the 
poor BIA oversight and management of locally operated TPA programs. The 
BIA has not been able to tell the Senate just how these funds are spend 
by tribal governments. Other than broad categories, the tribes 
themselves do not have to report how these funds are meeting trial 
needs and goals. There are so many eligible uses for these funds that 
tribes do not report TPA spending to the BIA with any specificity. In 
public safety, for example, TPA funds can be spend for police cars. 
Natural resource funds can be spent on growing blue corn or improving a 
fish hatchery.
  The BIA has little information about how tribal goals are being met 
with TPA funds, and TPA funds make up almost half of the entire BIA 
operations budget for Indian programs. Any effort to help us clarify 
the precise use of TPA funds will be a major step forward in 
accountability for both tribes and the BIA. I welcome a pilot effort to 
move toward that goal.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, Chairman Gorton and I have both 
discussed the TPA accountability issue with Kevin Gover, the Assistant 
Secretary for Indian Affairs at the BIA. Mr. Gover has recommended a 
pilot project at Eight Northern Pueblos Agency in New Mexico. The 
purpose of this pilot program would be to demonstrate the ability of 
tribes to assess their own needs and then develop TPA budgets that 
allow the BIA to track just how TPA funds are being used to achieve 
specific results for tribes.
  Mr. GORTON. I was glad to see this pilot program recommended in the 
TPA report I have recently received from the BIA. We required this 
report in last year's appropriations bill. I have also noted that Nambe 
Pueblo has gone through a long process of local meetings to catalog 
their needs and organize their plans for using TPA funds. They have 
persevered in developing a model needs based budget process.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Yes, Mr. Chairman, Nambe Pueblo leaders have broken new 
ground in developing budgets to meet their own needs. Nambe Pueblo is a 
small pueblo with 633 members. It is located about 20 miles north of 
Santa Fe. Their Governor, David Perez, and Councilman Tony Vigil and 
many others at Nambe have spent hours, days, and nights developing a 
very thorough description of their precise needs. They have worked 
closely with Eight Northern Indian Pueblos (ENIP) Executive Director 
Bernie Teba and ENIP Chairman Walter Dasheno, who is also Governor of 
Santa Clara Pueblo, to document their needs in several key categories.
  In the area of Land Resources, for example, Nambe Pueblo has 
identified a solid waste disposal system, flood and erosion control 
needs, and an agricultural land recovery plan. For community services, 
they have identified youth services and senior citizen services. Their 
facility needs have been catalogued, and their economic and tourism 
plans have been laid out.
  Mr. GORTON. This sounds like a very thorough effort. I would like to 
join Senator Domenici in commending the Nambe Pueblo for their hard 
work in developing a needs data base system that will enable them to 
track the use of TPA funds.
  Mr. DOMENICI. When Assistant Secretary Gover first presented this 
idea to me a few months ago, he told me that ENIP had developed a solid 
approach for accountability that should be tried as a pilot for other 
tribes to emulate. Some of the other members of ENIP are anxious to try 
this approach to becoming more accountable to their tribal members, the 
BIA, and the Congress. It is a lot of work, but there is also a lot of 
benefit to be able to map out a complete picture of tribal needs and 
resources.
  With Assistant Secretary Gover's continuing enthusiasm and support, I

[[Page S10842]]

am confident that a new beginning for accountability in TPA funding 
will actually be born at Nambe Pueblo. We will count on him to 
implement this ENIP pilot from existing TPA funds. We believe we have 
given him enough authority in this bill and other legislation to 
implement this accountability pilot program, and we look forward to its 
early success.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, like Senator Domenici, I look forward to a 
better future in accountability for TPA funds. This program is critical 
for tribes and they should also be able to measure their own progress 
against local needs as suggested by the Nambe Pueblo plan. I support 
this recommendation for a TPA accountability pilot program from 
existing TPA funds and I look forward to some positive results.
  Mr. DOMENICI. I thank the Chairman of the Interior Appropriations 
Subcommittee for his extraordinary efforts to bring fairness and 
accountability to the BIA's TPA Program. It is the single largest 
expenditure in the BIA, followed by school operations. I believe tribes 
will benefit from the fruits of this pilot, and the Congress will be 
better able to justify TPA expenditures. We will have better knowledge 
of just how TPA funds help tribes to meet their own local needs and 
goals.


                        alternate fuels research

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I understand that my colleague from 
Alaska wants to comment with me on Department of Energy funding for 
alternate fuels research.
  Mr. STEVENS. I do.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, as the chairman of the Committee on 
Appropriations knows, the Environmental Protection Agency and the 
country have been constantly seeking cleaner-burning diesel fuel. In 
fact, the administration has already announced new, stricter emissions 
standards for heavy vehicles as an incentive to move to other 
technologies. Would the Senator agree that the answer to this issue 
lies partly in the engine design, but more importantly in the type of 
fuel we burn?
  Mr. STEVENS. Yes, I agree with the Chairman of the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources. The Department of Energy has been 
investigating alternate fuels that would improve air emissions but not 
require a new infrastructure or delivery system such as would be 
required in the use of compressed natural gas. One possibility is Gas-
to-Liquids or GTL. The GTL process takes natural gas and converts it to 
a liquid fuel that has the characteristics of diesel fuel, only without 
sulfur, which interferes with the catalysts that clean up emissions.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Natural gas is nearly everywhere in the United States 
and does not need to be imported. We have somewhere between 30 to 60 
trillion cubic feet of natural gas in Alaska, which could replace a 
significant amount of the diesel fuel market, if the GTL process can be 
proved to be viable.
  I have been interested in securing funding a private-public 
partnership to study GTL's performance as fuel. The study will report 
on the following: (1) How important fuel characteristics affect the 
performance and emissions of different diesel engines; (2) Experimental 
performance of diesel engines burning fuels like GTL fuels; (3) Engine 
design modifications which enhance performance using such fuels; and 
(4) Chemistry of GTL production. I would ask if the subcommittee 
chairman is aware of the premise that GTL technology has in producing a 
cleaner burning fuel?
  Mr. GORTON. I am aware. ARCO, which is well known in Alaska, recently 
constructed and started a 70 barrel per day Gas-to-Liquids plant in 
Blaine, Washington, near Bellingham. ARCO did this with its own money 
and that of Syntroleum. With industry support like that we should 
encourage these developments. Pacific Northwest Lab is also heavily 
involved in diesel engine development because it is the most efficient 
internal combustion engine. Unfortunately, we had numerous constraints 
on the Interior appropriations this year.
  Mr. STEVENS. Perhaps my colleagues agree that we should try to work 
with the Department of Energy on organizing a more pronounced effort 
there to support research on cleaner diesel from natural gas.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. I hope we can join together to work with the 
Department of Energy to find some funds within the Department to 
support this effort.
  Mr. GORTON. I will be pleased to work with my colleagues from Alaska.


                              lake powell

  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, recently a handful of environmentalists 
have called for the draining of Lake Powell and the decommissioning of 
the Glen Canyon Dam. As the second largest man-made lake in the 
country, Lake Powell provides critically important water storage for 
the states of the Colorado River basin--the driest region in the United 
States. As many of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle already 
know, Mr. President, draining Lake Powell is unsupportable. This 
amendment puts this issue to rest once and for all. This legislation 
simply prohibits the federal government from taking any action to drain 
Lake Powell or to decommission the Glen Canyon Dam without 
Congressional approval.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I wish to say to my good friend from Utah 
that I agree that draining Lake Powell is not a reasonable proposal, 
and I support his effort to put the issue to rest with this amendment. 
However, I would like to ask my colleague from Utah if he believes that 
his amendment in any way opens the door to the administration to pursue 
the decommissioning of other Bureau of Reclamation projects without 
Congressional approval?
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I appreciate the support of the chairman of 
the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee in this matter which is of 
great concern to my constituents. Mr. President, this amendment in no 
way gives assent to the Secretary of the Interior or any other 
government official to decommission other water projects without 
Congressional approval. Any effort by the administration to 
decommission a Bureau of Reclamation project without the approval of 
Congress or of those most affected by the action, in my view, would be 
unsupportable.


         regarding the institute of museum and library services

  Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I want to commend the chairman for the 
excellent job he has done under difficult circumstances in providing 
funding for our cultural agencies--the National Endowments for the Arts 
(NEA) and the Humanities (NEH), and the Institute of Museum and Library 
Services (IMLS).
  Mr. GORTON. In Committee on the Senate side, we were able to boost 
funding for the Institute of Museum and Library Services by $500,000, 
from its fiscal year 1999 level of $23.405 million, to $23.905 million 
for fiscal year 2000. And now we have adopted the Cochran and Bennett 
amendments as part of the managers' amendment to boost funding for the 
NEH and NEA by $4.000 million each.
  Mr. MOYNIHAN. I was pleased to co-sponsor those amendments. I think 
we have done well by those two agencies. Now, as I understand it, the 
House of Representatives appropriated $24.400 million for IMLS.
  Mr. GORTON. Initially--that amount was subject to a 0.48 percent 
across-the-board reduction; consequently, the House-passed funding 
level is $24.282 million, or $377,000 more than what the Senate 
Committee on Appropriations reported.
  Mr. MOYNIHAN. As the chairman knows, several of us--Senators Warner, 
Bennett, Cochran, Jeffords, Reed, and Kennedy, among others--support 
the House-passed funding level for IMLS, and contemplated offering an 
amendment here on the floor to achieve it.
  Mr. GORTON. I say to my friend from New York that I am aware of the 
strong support for the IMLS here in the Senate. Rest assured that I 
will give every consideration to providing additional support for the 
IMLS when we go to conference on the bill.
  Mr. MOYNIHAN. This is wonderful news indeed. The Institute of Museum 
and Library Services provides essential support to our nation's 8,000 
non-Federal museums and, through a different appropriation, 120,000 
libraries. It goes about its business quietly and professionally, with 
scant attention paid here, but the thriving condition of our museums 
provides ample evidence of its competence and importance.
  I think, perhaps, we have turned the corner on Federal support for 
the arts

[[Page S10843]]

and humanities, for culture. The chairman deserves much of the credit 
and an enormous debt of gratitude for his unwavering support for the 
NEA, NEH, and IMLS and for steadily shepherding their appropriations 
during these past few, difficult years.


    Federal Museum Collections at the Utah Museum of Natural History

  Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I want to raise an issue that was 
recently brought to my attention in Utah. It is a long-term project 
that I intend to undertake and I hope that the committee will support 
me in this effort.
  The Utah Museum of Natural History contains collections of more than 
one million objects and specimens in the fields of geology, biology and 
anthropology. It ranks as one of the largest and most comprehensive 
collections for the western states. Overall, more than 75 percent of 
the museum's collections are federally owned; that is, recovered from 
federally managed public lands. Of the remaining 25 percent of the 
collections, a significant portion was collected on state lands under 
federally mandated permitting procedures. The museum is a repository 
for collections from BLM, Forest Service, Park Service and Bureau of 
Reclamation lands. Additional specimens have been collected from 
Department of Defense lands as well.
  There are numerous authorities defining the legal relationship 
between the federal agencies and museums and research universities such 
as the Smithsonian's Organic Act passed in 1879, the Antiquities Act of 
1906, NEPA and most recently, the National Archaeological Graves 
Protection and Reburial Act of 1990. The large number of federal 
collections in the museum is the consequence of the high percentage of 
federally owned lands in Utah. Utah ranks second among all states in 
percentage of federal lands; thus, field research in the natural 
sciences in Utah largely takes place on federal lands.
  Unfortunately, the current facilities at the Utah Museum of Natural 
History used to house the federal collections are inadequate. Lack of 
space, materials, supplies and personnel have created a situation where 
the collections are in jeopardy of being permanently lost. This is not 
in anyway caused by the neglect of the museum staff, but it is simply a 
lack of space and funding to adequately store all of the collections 
properly.
  I became interested when this situation was brought to my attention a 
few months ago. Since that time, my staff have been looking into 
various options to help remedy the situation. In the meantime, the 
museum has done a tremendous job putting together a master plan, 
organizing partners and seeking private donations to relocate the 
museums. But they are limited in their ability to raise funds without 
some federal participation and commitment. And with that in mind, I 
want to seek the chairman's input on that question. Does the chairman 
believe that the federal agencies such as the BLM, Forest Service and 
the National Park Service have a legitimate role in helping remedy this 
situation?
  MR. GORTON. The Senator raises a good point. Obviously there is a 
federal interest in protecting these collections. While I cannot commit 
to providing funding for this project in the future, I will work 
closely with my colleague from Utah. Until that time, however, I think 
it would be quite appropriate for the various agencies to lend their 
resources and expertise by participating the partnership that has been 
created. I would encourage them to do so.
  MR. BENNETT. I thank the chairman and I look forward to working with 
him.


                institute of museum and library services

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, will the Senator from Washington care to 
enter into a colloquy regarding museums funding?
  Mr. GORTON. I thank the Senator from Virginia and will be happy to 
engage in a colloquy.
  Mr. WARNER. I understand the need to adequately address arts funding 
and commend the Chairman's leadership in securing $500,000 above last 
year's appropriations for our nation's museums and libraries. However, 
this is still $500,000 short of the House funding level to continue the 
great work done by the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS).
  As the Chairman knows, federal funds play an important role in 
assuring that Americans have access to excellent museum services. 8,000 
museums and 120,000 libraries throughout the country have benefited 
from Congressional support of IMLS.
  IMLS programs affect a broad segment of Americans and not an elite 
few. It helps small, rural museums gain access to resources such as 
database technology development by the larger museums. IMLS improves 
public accessibility of museums, while allowing local communities to 
decide on the content and programs of their own museums.
  Additional funding will allow IMLS to provide technological 
improvements, making museum and library collections available online 
and accessible to learners of all ages.
  I ask you to urge the Senate conferees to recede to the House 
position on IMLS funding and support a relatively modest $500,000 
increase in the IMLS budget so museums and libraries across the country 
will be able to extend their educational services, expand teacher 
training, preserve our cultural heritage for our posterity and increase 
access to valuable resources for America's children.
  Mr. GORTON. I thank the Senator from Virginia and I will be pleased 
to recommend that the conferees consider your thoughtful request to 
recede to the House proposal, which increases funding for the IMLS by 
an amount of $500,000 above the Senate level. I appreciate the Senator 
from Virginia's support for the work of the IMLS and hope that our 
final allocation is such that we are able to provide additional funding 
for museum programs of the IMLS.
  Mr. WARNER. I thank the Senator from Washington.


                      funding for mark twain house

  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I rise to express my regret that the 
Interior Appropriations bill under consideration here includes no money 
for the Save America's Treasury Campaign. I would like to describe one 
of the many important projects that will go unrealized for lack of 
funding. This valuable project is the preservation of the Mark Twain 
House in Hartford, Connecticut, and construction of a complementary 
education and visitor center near the house.
  Mark Twain wrote seven major books, including ``Tom Sawyer'' and the 
``Adventures of Huckleberry Finn,'' while living with his family in the 
house, which he built in 1874. It is projected that the visitor's 
center would help double--to a total of 100,000--the annual number of 
visitors to Mark Twain House and contribute an estimated 12 million 
dollars every year to the Connecticut economy.
  If money does come available for the Save America's Treasures 
Campaign, would you agree that the Mark Twain House should be high on 
the priority list?
  Mr. GORTON. Yes. Mark Twain is a historical and cultural icon of 
great importance. Mark Twain's written works represent an American 
literature legacy and I know that this project is of great importance 
to Connecticut and to America.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank Senator Gorton. I appreciate his hard work on 
this important legislation.


               glacier bay np visitor facilities funding

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I wonder if the Subcommittee chairman 
would be willing to discuss with myself and the senior senator from 
Alaska, the Chairman of the full committee on Appropriations certain 
issues regarding the Glacier Bay National Park Visitor Facility.
  Mr. GORTON. Yes, I will join the Appropriations Chairman and the 
Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I thank my good friend. Being a member 
of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources the subcommittee 
chairman is well aware of Glacier Bay National Park. He is aware of it 
this year for some of the controversy that has been caused by the Park 
Service's attempts to prohibit commercial and subsistence fishing 
within the bounds of the park.
  However, there is an area that the local community, the Park Service, 
and the Alaska Congressional Delegation do want to work together on in 
the park--a new visitor facility. Glacier Bay National Park is one of 
Alaska's treasures. More than 350,000 visitors come to the park each 
year. Currently, there is no single place for them

[[Page S10844]]

to go to learn about the park resources, native inhabitants, and 
spectacular beauty. The local native corporation has proposed a shared 
cost effort with the Park Service to build such a facility. Is the 
subcommittee chairman aware of this?
  Mr. GORTON. I am aware of these efforts and would encourage the 
National Park Service to work closely with the native corporation to 
further develop this proposal in light of the fact that they use 
private dollars to maximize public resources. Visitor centers are 
becoming a very expensive item in the Interior budget. This approach 
should set an example for future facilities of this type.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Currently there is not a specific line item 
appropriation in the bill before us, H.R. 2466, for this project. 
However, it would be my hope that in conference the senior senator from 
Alaska and the Subcommittee Chairman could work to find the dollars for 
design and construction needed to make this visitor center a reality.
  Mr. STEVENS. I say to my colleague from Alaska that I will work with 
him to try and find the funds needed for this project. It is a god 
project for the community and a worthwhile one for the government. I 
have been a Glacier Bay on numerous occasions and am supportive of 
increased visitor facilities. As I understand it no authorization is 
needed for this as the Secretary has existing authority under section 
1307 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. The Senator is correct. Authorization does exist to do 
this.
  Mr. GORTON. I will be pleased to continue to work with my colleagues 
on this project. I note that the Subcommittee has made a significant 
effort in this bill to provide for visitor facilities in Alaska, but 
agree that additional facilities at Glacier Bay National Park are 
needed.


                          UTAH SPECIFIC ISSUES

  Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I would like to briefly raise four issues 
with the Chairman for clarification. Utah is in the process of creating 
a GIS database on public lands. Is it the Chairman's understanding that 
the $300,000 of federal funds appropriated through the BLM Realty and 
Ownership management will be combined with the funds appropriated by 
the State of Utah and then distributed to the rural counties by the 
special committee created by the State Legislature?
  Mr. GORTON. The Senator is correct. However, the rural counties 
should also seek the expertise of Utah State University and the State 
of Utah and rely on their personnel to complete this mapping project.
  Mr. BENNETT. I thank the Chairman. With regards to the Olympic Tree 
program funded under the Community and Urban Forestry account, given 
the nature of Olympic partners and the reliance upon in-kind donations, 
is it the Committee's position that the local match may also include 
in-kind donations such as land, labor and materials?
  Mr. GORTON. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. BENNETT. With regards to the proposed final management plan for 
the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument, is it the Chairman's 
understanding that the State of Utah's authority over wildlife 
management and wildlife damage prevention within the monument shall 
remain unchanged?
  Mr. GORTON. The Senator is correct. The Committee would be concerned 
should the language of the final management plan diminish the ability 
of the State of Utah to manage wildlife damage prevention within the 
Monument. If this is the case, I would hope BLM would consult with the 
State of Utah during the Governor's Consistency Review to amend that 
language to prevent any potential conflict that might occur.
  Mr. BENNETT. Again, I thank the Chairman. I have one final question 
regarding the Desert Tortoise Recovery program. There is a proposal by 
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to create a new position of a 
tortoise recovery coordinator that reports out of the Reno Nevada 
office. This is of concern to me. As the Chairman knows, Washington 
County has made tremendous progress toward completing a Habitat 
Conservation Plan and recovery program. They have put together an 
effective, balanced team and compared to other recovery units, 
Washington County and its key partners including the State of Utah, BLM 
and State Parks have accomplished a great deal over the last five 
years. All of this was accomplished without a tortoise coordinator to 
oversee the project.
  There are a couple of issues I believe should be addressed prior to 
the creation of proposed coordinator position. Issues such as 
determining which office would make section 7 evaluations regarding 
tortoises in Washington County--Salt Lake City or Reno? I would also 
like to know how the creation of such a position will impact funding 
and how do we insure that state and local communities are not adversely 
impacted. In order to preserve the good working relationship among the 
parties in Utah, I would hope the Chairman would support me in this 
position until these questions are answered.
  Mr. GORTON. The Senator raises a good point. I am aware of the 
progress which has been made to date and I congratulate the Advisory 
Board on their efforts. I share the Senator's concerns about the 
creation of such a position. It is unclear to me how a single 
coordinator position from outside the Region would specifically help 
Washington County and BLM administer the HCP and improve things on the 
ground.
  Mr. BENNETT. I thank the Chairman for his support.


               biocatalytic desulfurization technologies

  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I would like to clarify the intent of 
one provision within the bill. As we all are aware the Environmental 
Protection Agency is proposing to reduce the levels of sulfur in 
gasoline and diesel fuel. I note that the bill before us recognizes 
this new proposal and urges the Department of Energy to continue 
research on biocatalytic desulfurization technologies to assist the 
refining industry in meeting these new requirements. Was it the 
Committee's intent that the Department continue to support the ongoing 
gasoline biodesulfurization project in the Industries of the Future 
program in an effort to ensure that the technology is available to the 
refining industry to meet the new EPA rules?
  Mr. GORTON. That was the intent of the Committee. This research is 
very promising and I thank you for bringing this point to our 
attention.


                  archie carr national wildlife refuge

  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask the distinguished chairman of the 
subcommittee if he would consent to discuss with Senator Mack and me 
one of Florida's national wildlife refuges, the Archie Carr National 
Wildlife Refuge in Brevard County, Florida.
  Mr. GORTON. I am pleased to join my colleague from Florida in a 
colloquy.
  Mr. GRAHAM. The Archie Carr National Wildlife Refuge is located in 
Brevard County, Florida, home of Florida's ``Space Coast.'' The 900-
acre refuge extends along the coast from Melbourne Beach to Wabasso 
Beach, and it is home to the most important nesting area for loggerhead 
sea turtles in the western hemisphere and the second most important 
nesting beach in the world. Twenty-five percent of all loggerhead sea 
turtle and 35% of all green sea turtle nests in the United States occur 
in this twenty mile zone.
  Mr. MACK. The Refuge currently co-exists with Florida's Space Coast. 
However, sea turtle nesting at this site is sensitive to impacts from 
development and human activity. To mitigate these impacts, the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service coordinates with the local and state 
governments regarding joint management of beaches, index nesting beach 
surveys, public education programs, and appropriate public use 
facilities.
  Mr. GRAHAM. It is my experience that in this type of situation, the 
best answer is land acquisition. Right now, approximately half of the 
900-acres of the designated refuge is available for acquisition. Four 
key parcels make up the core area of the potential acquisition.
  I recognize the extreme funding pressures that the subcommittee faced 
while determining its Land and Water Conservation Fund priorities. We 
feel that the Archie Carr Refuge is a key priority for Florida given 
its criticality to the loggerhead sea turtle population.
  We request your consideration of this project during the conference 
with the House on the Interior Appropriations bill.

[[Page S10845]]

  Mr. GORTON. I appreciate the Senators' comments. The Committee shares 
your view that the protection of the loggerhead sea turtle is critical, 
and we will consider the needs of the Archie Carr National Wildlife 
Refuge during our conference with the House.


                        sea turtle conservation

  Mr. BREAUX. Mr. President, will the distinguished Chairman of the 
Interior Appropriations Subcommittee yield for a question?
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I will gladly yield to a question from my 
good friend from Louisiana.
  Mr. BREAUX. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Chairman. I 
commend the gentleman from Washington and the distinguished ranking 
member Mr. Byrd for the great leadership they have demonstrated in 
crafting the FY2000 Interior Appropriations bill. Of great personal 
interest to me is a Kemp's Ridley sea turtle project that is, in part, 
funded through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This project is a 
twenty-year-old on-going success story in the recovery of a high 
endangered species. Since 1978, the United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, USFWS, has spearheaded the sea turtle conservation work at 
Rancho Nuevo, Mexico. This collaborative conservation project with the 
Mexican government and the U.S. shrimp industry through the National 
Fisheries Institute protects Kemp's Ridley sea turtle nests an females 
from predation and other hazards, and ensures that young turtles make 
it into the sea. This project is the longest standing collaborative 
conservation project between the United States and Mexico without a 
formal treaty. This year, despite the demonstrable success of the 
project, the Fish and Wildlife Service did not dedicated funds to the 
Kemp's Ridley sea turtle project. I am extremely concerned and want to 
express my strong support for continued funding for this valuable 
conservation effort.
  Mr. GORTON. It is clear from my friend's statement that he knows much 
about the sea turtle conservation project, and I share his enthusiasm 
for these important efforts to protect the Kemp's Ridley sea turtle. 
While I am keenly aware of the fiscal constraints on the Fish and 
Wildlife Service, I encourage the Service to consider providing 
whatever support it can within these existing budget constraints.
  Mr. BYRD. I agree with my colleagues from Washington and Louisiana. 
The Fish and Wildlife Service should make every effort to support this 
project in order to uphold a scientifically justified success in 
endangered species management
  Mr. BREAUX. I thank my colleagues.


       advanced development project powder river coal initiative

  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I thank my colleague for addressing the 
potential benefits that could come from a new coal enhancement 
procedure being developed in my home state of Wyoming that would 
provide a unique economic development opportunity for the Crow nation 
and its surrounding rural communications in Montana and Wyoming.
  This project, known as the advanced development project Powder River 
coal initiative, is designed to develop a training program for the Crow 
nation that will create future employment opportunities for members of 
the tribe by utilizing a new technology that permanently removes the 
moisture from the Powder River Basin's low grade sub-bituminous coal. 
It is important that we must continue to develop programs like this 
advanced development project to further the twin goals of environmental 
protection and economic stability.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I appreciate the comments of my colleague 
from Wyoming and agree there is a serious need to bolster the economy 
within the Crown nation. Further development of the tribe's vast coal 
reserves would go a long way toward improving the tribes current 
situation. I would like to assure my colleague that I will continue to 
work with him and with my colleague from the South Dakota to explore 
projects like the advanced development project Powder River coal 
initiative to see if we can't find a way to help the Crow nation 
develop its vital coal resources.


                      mari sandoz cultural center

  Mr. KERREY. I rise today with my good friend and colleague, Senator 
Hagel, to talk about a very important and worthwhile project, the Mari 
Sandoz High Plains Heritage Center in Chadron, Nebraska.
  Mari Sandoz was a world-renowned and internationally-acclaimed 
writer, born and raised in the Nebraska Sand Hills. Drawing on her 
childhood experiences and her research at the Nebraska State Historical 
Society, Sandoz wrote passionately and poetically about life on the 
Great Plains. Her works dealt with the early fur traders, the Plains 
Indians, the cattlemen and ranchers, the immigrant homesteaders, and 
the persecution of the Northern Cheyenne and Ogallala Sioux. Through 
her writing, Sandoz played an important role in the cultural 
preservation of the Western Nebraska of the 1800s and early 1900s. 
Preserving her works and her legacy is a way of preserving our own 
cultural heritage.
  Mr. HAGEL. I join my friend, the senior Senator from Nebraska, in 
supporting a federal appropriation for the Mari Sandoz Cultural Center.
  Nebraska has produced a number of this nation's most significant 
writers. The John Neihardt Center in Bancroft and the Willa Cather 
Center in Red Cloud commemorate two of Nebraska's most famous literary 
figures. A facility dedicated to Mari Sandoz would be an appropriate 
addition on to the state's literary heritage.
  Following Mari Sandoz's death, Chadron State College came into 
possession of her writing and personal artifacts. The College developed 
the idea of the cultural center as the best way to preserve her legacy. 
Plans for the center include museum display areas for American Indians 
and Sandoz family artifacts, rooms for meetings and workshops on 
Sandoz' work, archives for Sandoz' manuscripts, and an herbarium that 
will complement the descriptions of regional flora central to Sandoz' 
literature. The center would be a perfect tribute to one of Nebraska's 
finest writers.
  Mr. KERREY. I agree that the construction of the Center is an 
important commemoration of Sandoz' contributions to Nebraska. Earlier 
this year, I requested that $450,000 be appropriated from available 
funds in the National Park Service's Historic Preservation Fund or the 
Save America's Treasures to fund the Mari Sandoz Cultural Center. These 
dollars will help renovate, rehabilitate, and equip the former library 
facility on the Chadron State campus.
  Mr. HAGEL. It is my understanding that these federal dollars will be 
in addition to the private dollars raised by Chadron State College and 
the Mari Sandoz Heritage Society.
  Mr. KERREY. Yes, both organizations have been working diligently to 
raise $900,000 in private funding for the construction and equipment of 
the new Center. I am hopeful that we will be able to provide additional 
Federal dollars for this historically and culturally significant 
Center.
  Mr. HAGEL. We both realize that budget restraints are tight this 
year. But I am hopeful that Chairman Gorton and Ranking Minority Member 
Byrd will find a way to fully fund this project when the conference 
committee meets on the Interior appropriations bill later this fall.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, issues surrounding natural resource 
management present some of the most contentious and difficult problems 
we as policymakers face. Trying to ensure that our federal forestry 
policy is responsible and environmentally sustainable has been 
especially difficult, and we have sometimes fallen woefully short in 
this area. We can and must do much better. I have seen the awful 
results of clear-cutting, uncontrolled erosion, and other abuses by the 
logging industry, and I believe we must bring those abuses to an end 
now.
  Even so, our national forests are tremendous resources for a variety 
of uses, including everything from timber harvesting to recreation. My 
state of Minnesota depends on these resources for jobs and family 
incomes; wood, industrial materials, paper and pulp; and family 
vacations and recreation. Above all, we must protect our national 
forests to ensure that these resources will be available for future 
generations. For these reasons, I have long supported carefully 
controlled, environmentally sustainable multiple use of our national 
forests.
  I share many of my colleague Senator Bryan's legitimate concerns 
about the future health of our nation's

[[Page S10846]]

forests, and about the abuses that have been allowed in certain regions 
under the Forest Service's timber sales program--especially in 
essential areas of biodiversity such as the Pacific Northwest. I 
recognize that these environmentally harmful forest management 
practices have serious long-term consequences for the health of our 
forests, and that they must be stopped.
  The Timber Sale Management Program is in need of significant reform 
in many regions of our nation. I believe that my record shows clearly 
my support for reforming the program to ensure a more responsible and 
environmentally sustainable forestry effort. But this amendment would 
reduce by approximately $32 million current funding levels for the 
program, and it could create some special problems in my state, where 
the Forest Service has generally been quite responsible in its timber 
sale efforts.
  In my state of Minnesota, on July 4, 1999, we experienced a huge, 
once-in-a-thousand-year wind and rain storm that damaged and destroyed 
homes, businesses, public facilities, and wilderness areas in our 
national forests. Approximately 300,000 acres in seven counties were 
hit by the storm, which damaged as much as 70 percent of the trees in 
certain areas and washed out numerous roads. The damage caused by this 
storm has severely hindered the U.S. Forest Service's ability to 
responsibly manage the Chippewa and Superior National Forests. While I 
have worked successfully with my colleagues in the Minnesota delegation 
to ensure that approximately $12 million in emergency funding is 
reprogrammed from elsewhere in the Forest Service budget to support 
timber salvage efforts in Minnesota, it is clear that much is yet to be 
done, and that it is going to take many years to dig out from under the 
storm and to restore the forest to its former state.
  As I've observed, the Forest Service in Minnesota has a long 
tradition of generally responsible and publicly accountable forest 
management practices. I believe, especially as the post-storm clean-up 
there proceeds over the coming months and years, that the Forest 
Service must have adequate resources to deal with the storm's 
devastation. This amendment would cut approximately $32 million from 
proposed funding for the Timber Sale Management Program, decreasing 
last year's funding for this program by approximately $30 million. 
While I know that this funding is not yet precisely allocated to the 
various regions, I am concerned that a cut of this size might constrain 
the Service's overall capacity to adequately support efforts to 
recover, repair and rehabilitate public lands in Minnesota hard hit by 
the storm, and for that reason I think it would be unwise.
  As I said, I recognize the problems with the Timber Sales Management 
Program, particularly in the Pacific Northwest, and I remain committed 
to supporting efforts to bring a halt to these environmentally 
unsustainable abuses. Even though I cannot support this amendment 
today, I look forward to working with my colleague Senator Bryan and 
others to find ways to reform and improve the forest management 
practices of the Forest Service, and of those private industry firms 
with whom it cooperates, to eliminate the abuses of our forests which 
have been brought to light during this debate.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, the Endangered Species Act listing of 
various runs of salmon throughout the Northwest has been a wake-up call 
for Washingtonians. We have seen an unprecedented decline in a 
historically vibrant salmon population, relied upon by countless 
sportsmen, commercial and tribal fishermen, and those of us who see 
salmon as a Northwest cultural icon.
  And for years, at all levels of government, we've spent billions of 
dollars in an effort to recover this important species, but we've seen 
little in return. Millions and millions of dollars have been spent on 
massive studies. Millions of dollars have fueled growing bureaucracies 
to address the problem and create new regulations that may or may not 
save the fish.
  In all the flurry of activity and spending, one, largely unrecognized 
effort has done more in our rivers and streams to improve salmon 
habitat than almost anything else in which we've invested our 
resources. Across Washington state, small, local volunteer groups spend 
their weekends restoring streams, revegetating riparian areas and 
creating healthy, inviting places for salmon to return. They recruit 
people from all over the community to spend a few hours on the weekend 
working in their local stream, river, or anywhere else that will make a 
difference for the fish.
  In many cases, these locally-grown groups are able to work 
cooperatively with private landowners to restore streams and rivers 
that run through their property. These efforts achieve results and make 
all parties satisfied with the outcome in a way that government-
mandated directives could never do.
  That's why my 1999 Interior Appropriations bill includes a $4 million 
appropriation for these groups to be able to continue their hard work 
and worthy efforts. The money will be appropriated to the National Fish 
and Wildlife Foundation to distribute, as quickly as possible, to 
locally-organized, on-the-ground salmon enhancement organizations.
  These groups' potential for positive contributions to salmon recovery 
are immeasurable. For instance, a stream on the North Shore of Hood 
Canal would be an excellent salmon spawning and over wintering habitat 
if it were not for man-made barriers to fish passage. The Hood Canal 
Salmon Enhancement Group (HCSEG) would like to remove the 3 foot 
diameter pipe, which the stream now runs through, and correct the 
immediate four foot drop in the stream level. Replacing the pipe with 
an appropriately sized culvert and fishway would open up 1.7 miles of 
habitat for chum, coho, and steelhead. Hood Canal SEG likes to call 
these projects ``no-brainers'' because the habitat already exists, the 
fish just need to be able to get there.
  Local residents are critical to these salmon recovery efforts, where 
intimate historic knowledge of seasonal flows, fish populations, and 
specific migratory trends don't typically exist outside the community.
  Another group, Long Live the Kings (LLTK), is contributing to the 
recovery of listed salmonids in Hood Canal. At their Lilliwaup 
facility, LLTK is operating a captive rearing and supplementation 
program for threatened steelhead and summer chum. I was happy to have 
helped find funding for this program last year, and am pleased to 
continue this support.
  While in the state during our August recess, I met with the Nooksack 
Salmon Enhancement Association out of Bellingham, Washington. This 
group, with the passionate leadership of volunteers like Mike and 
Elaine McRory, have taken on habitat restoration projects in urban and 
rural areas alike, successfully soliciting the cooperation of private 
landowners to recover local stocks. Landowner participation is often 
contagious, and NSEA has seen one project on a given stream turn into 
two, three, or even more.
  It should be clear that organizations across Washington State, not 
just those within the Puget Sound basin, are eligible to apply for 
these funds. In fact my staff will be traveling to Okanogan county at 
the end of this month to introduce members of the local community to 
NFWF representatives.
  Grants for local groups through the National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation provide a much needed funding source for long overdue 
projects ranging from Skagit FEG's Little Baker River Side Channel 
project, which would open one mile of chinook spawning and rearing 
habitat, to riparian restoration in Newaukum and Portage Creeks, 
conducted by Mid-Sound FEG and Stilli-Snohomish Fisheries Enhancement 
Task Force.
  The amount appropriated to the NFWF does include an earmark for a 
group that deserves special recognition for their efforts to clean up 
our local water, essential to salmon recovery success. River CPR's 
Puget Sound Drain Guard Campaign will employ volunteer labor to install 
devices aimed at trapping 90 percent of the oil and sediment that 
typically flows into storm drains. It is evident that this small amount 
of money is going to go a long way towards recovering salmon across our 
state.
  Here is what some of these groups have to say about this initiative:

[[Page S10847]]

  ``Senator Gorton's proposal to use the National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation to direct funding to the local level is very innovative and 
will ensure that the funds are used where they most help fish, on the 
ground,'' said one Mid Sound Fisheries Enhancement Group board member.
  Alison Studley writes, ``As a member of the Skagit Fisheries 
Enhancement Group (Skagit FEG), I whole-heartedly support your endeavor 
to get salmon dollars to support on-the-ground projects. Local 
organizations are ready, willing and able to take on this challenge.''
  In sum: I believe that Washingtonians and local salmon restoration 
organizations--not bureaucracies in Washington, D.C.--are in the best 
position to make decisions that will return salmon. That's why my 1999 
Interior Bill includes money for these local groups--who have been 
working on this problem for years--so they can decide how to restore 
the fisheries. It's time for the federal government to let those who 
will be affected by the decisions make these decisions. Salmon are a 
critical part of the Northwest way of life, so let Northwesterners 
decide how to fix this problem without being told how to do it from 
Washington, D.C.

                          ____________________