Congressional Record, Volume 161 Issue 103 (Thursday, June 25, 2015)

[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 103 (Thursday, June 25, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H4699-H4761]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2016

General Leave

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on consideration of the H.R. 2822, and
that I may include tabular material on the same.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Denham). Pursuant to House Resolution
333 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of
the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the
bill, H.R. 2822.
The Chair appoints the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves) to
preside over the Committee of the Whole.

{time} 1254

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 2822) making appropriations for the Department of the Interior,
environment, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September
30, 2016, and for other purposes, with Mr. Graves of Louisiana in the
chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert) and the gentlewoman from
Minnesota (Ms. McCollum) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to bring to the floor H.R. 2822, the
fiscal year 2016 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations bill.
As we begin, I want to personally thank Chairman Rogers for his
leadership and support. Under his guidance, the Committee on
Appropriations is again setting the standard for getting things done in
the House. The Interior bill is the seventh appropriation bill to come
to the floor so far this year.
I also want to thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum),
my good friend and ranking member, for her partnership and work on this
bill.
Finally, I want to thank each of our subcommittee members for their
efforts and the collegiality that continues to be the hallmark of our
subcommittee's deliberations. Even though we may have differences of
opinion within this bill, I greatly appreciate the Members'
constructive contribution, and I mean that sincerely.
The committee has made very difficult choices preparing this bill. As
reported by the Committee on Appropriations, the fiscal year 2016
Interior and Environment bill is funded at $30.17 billion, which is
$246 million below the fiscal year 2015-enacted level and $3 billion
below the budget request. We have made a sincere effort to prioritize
needs within our 302(b) allocation. I would like to point out a few of
the highlights.
Again, this year, the committee has provided robust wildland fire
funding. Fire suppression accounts at the Department of the Interior
and the Forest Service are fully funded at the 10-year average level.
The hazardous fuels program was increased by $75 million to $526
million in the fiscal year 2015-enacted bill, and that increase has
been maintained in this bill.
This bill also continues critical investments in Indian Country, a
nonpartisan priority of the committee. Building upon the bipartisan
work of the former subcommittee chairmen Mike Simpson, Jim Moran, and
Norm Dicks, this bill continues to make investments in education,
public safety, and health programs in Indian Country.
Overall, funding for the Indian Health Service is increased by $145
million, or 3 percent, while funding for the Bureaus of Indian Affairs
and Education is increased by $165 million, or 6 percent, from fiscal
year 2015 levels, the largest percentage increase in this bill.
This bill provides full funding in fiscal year 2016 for the Payment
in Lieu of Taxes, or PILT, payments. PILT payments are made to 49 of
the 50 States as well as to the District of Columbia, Guam, the U.S.
Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
The bill provides $2.7 billion for the National Park Service,
including more than $60 million in new funding, relating to the
centennial of the Park Service.
We have also addressed a number of priorities within the Fish and
Wildlife Service accounts. The bill funds popular cost-shared grant
programs above the fiscal year 2015-enacted levels. It also provides
additional funds to combat international wildlife trafficking, protects
fish hatcheries from cuts and closures, continues funding to fight
invasive species, and reduces the backlog of species that are recovered
but not yet de-listed.

[[Page H4700]]

The bill provides $248 million for the Land and Water Conservation
Fund, programs that enjoy broad support--bipartisan support, for that
matter. Some Members would prefer more funding; others would prefer
less for LWCF. We have attempted to forge a middle ground that begins
to return the emphasis of the Land and Water Conservation Fund to its
original intent of recreation and State and local acquisitions.
Overall, funding for EPA is reduced by $718 million, or 9 percent,
from fiscal year 2015-enacted levels. Members from the Great Lakes
region will be pleased to know that the Great Lakes Restoration
Initiative is maintained at the fiscal year 2015-enacted level of $300
million. Rural water technical assistance grants and many categorical
grants, including radon grants, are level funded at the fiscal year
2015 enacted level.
Again this year, there is a great deal of concern over the number of
regulatory actions being pursued by the EPA in the absence of
legislation and without clear congressional direction. For this reason,
the bill includes a number of provisions to stop unnecessary and
damaging regulatory overreach by the Agency.
Before closing, I would like to address the Endangered Species Act
provisions in this bill. We have no interest in interfering with
science or letting any species go extinct, but we are concerned about
Federal regulatory actions lacking in basic fairness and common sense.
The provisions in this bill address problems created by an ESA driven
not by science, but by court orders that drain limited Agency resources
and force the Department to cut corners to meet arbitrary deadlines.
Nowhere is this more evident than with the sage-grouse.

{time} 1300

States are rightfully concerned that a listing or unnecessarily
restrictive Federal land use plans will jeopardize existing
conservation partnerships with States and private landowners. These
partnerships are necessary to save both the sagebrush ecosystem and
local economies.
So long as sage-grouse are not under imminent threat of extinction,
cooperative conservation must be given a chance to work. That is why
this bill maintains a 1-year delay on any decision to list sage-grouse
along with full funding to implement conservation efforts.
House consideration of this bill is the next step in a long
legislative process. I hope over the coming months we will come
together, as we do each year, to find common ground. In that spirit, I
look forward to continuing to work with Ms. McCollum and the Members of
the House on both sides of the aisle.
In closing, I want to thank the staff on both sides for their hard
work on this bill. On the minority side, I would like to thank Rick
Healy, Rita Culp, Joe Carlile, as well as Rebecca Taylor. They have
played an integral role in the process, and their efforts are very much
appreciated.
On the majority side, I would like to thank subcommittee staff
Kristin Richmond, Jackie Kilroy, Betsy Bina, Jason Gray, Darren
Benjamin, and Dave LesStrang. I would also like to thank Ian Foley,
Rebecca Keightley, Alexandra Berenter, and Tricia Evans on my personal
staff for their great work.
Mr. Chairman, this is a good bill. It deserves the support of the
Members of this body.
I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H4701]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.001

[[Page H4702]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.002

[[Page H4703]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.003

[[Page H4704]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.004

[[Page H4705]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.005

[[Page H4706]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.006

[[Page H4707]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.007

[[Page H4708]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.008

[[Page H4709]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.009

[[Page H4710]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.010

[[Page H4711]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.011

[[Page H4712]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.012

[[Page H4713]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.013

[[Page H4714]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.014

[[Page H4715]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.015

[[Page H4716]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.016

[[Page H4717]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.017

[[Page H4718]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.018

[[Page H4719]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.019

[[Page H4720]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.020

[[Page H4721]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.021

[[Page H4722]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JN15.022

[[Page H4723]]

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
First, I would like to acknowledge and thank Ranking Member Lowey for
her support and her mentorship as I start working on this very first
appropriations bill on the House floor.
I would like to thank my subcommittee chairman, Ken Calvert, for the
effort he has put into this bill. I appreciate that even as Chairman
Calvert grappled with an inadequate funding allocation, he carried out
his work in an open and thoughtful manner. The chairman is to be
commended for his diligence in holding 14 budget hearings, where we
received testimony from nearly 150 witnesses.
Let me also, along with the chairman, express my appreciation to the
subcommittee staff on the minority and majority sides for their hard
work during another difficult budget year.
Unfortunately, the inadequate 302(b) allocation given to the
Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations sets this
bill up for failure. The majority's refusal to adopt a sufficient
overall budget allocation for discretionary appropriations has led to a
bill that severely underfunds investments and protections that are
priorities for the American people.
The subcommittee's 302(b) allocation for FY 2016 is $246 million
below the current year's enacted level. When added to the cuts of the
past 5 years, this bill is more than $2 billion below the FY 2010
enacted level. In fact, when adjusted for inflation, this bill invests
less than what was appropriated in 2005.
But it gets worse. The rising emergency costs of combating wildland
fires, court-ordered Native American contract support costs, and the
majority's decision to abandon mandatory funding for the Payment in
Lieu of Taxes program, otherwise known as PILT, means the remaining
funding available for other critical public programs is far below the
FY 2015 enacted.
PILT has been mandatory spending in the past, and almost 2,000
counties use this compensation for lost tax revenue to provide vital
services. PILT should not be in this discretionary bill. It should be
returned to mandatory spending.
The courts have ruled that Congress must pay full contract support
costs to tribal nations. Contract support costs are true mandatory
spending, and they should not be in this discretionary bill.
Catastrophic wildland fires are natural disasters and, just as any
other natural disaster, they should be treated as such emergency
spending. Catastrophic wildland fires should not be subject to
discretionary spending caps in this bill.
Together, spending on these three activities consumes $5.4 billion,
or 18 percent of the bill's budget allocation. It is time for the
authorizing committees to stop ignoring this problem and responsibly
address what are truly mandatory costs, because these costs are burning
through our budget allocation.
So what does that mean for the rest of the programs funded by H.R.
2822? After years of cuts and flat funding, it means we are going
backwards and undermining efforts to preserve America's natural and
cultural heritage, failing to meet our commitments to the social and
economic well-being of Native Americans, and causing real and lasting
harm to the environment.
We received compelling testimony this year on the unmet needs in
Indian Country, especially in the areas of education and health. Yet
this bill's inadequate allocation means that many Native American
programs receive far less funding than what the President requested and
what Native Americans indeed deserve.
This is unfortunate because, as the chairman pointed out, he and I
share a deep bipartisan commitment to bettering the lives of Native
Americans and to uphold our Federal trust and treaty obligations.
Last year, attendance at our national parks was at a record high.
With the upcoming centennial of the National Park Service in 2016,
visitation is expected to increase. But what will visitors find when
they come to the centennial celebration?
Without additional funding, they will find historic hotels in
Yellowstone and Glacier National Parks that have serious health,
safety, and accessibility issues. They will find closed facilities at
Yosemite due to 70-year-old sewer lines that are failing. And under the
Republican spending plan, what visitors will not find are the hundreds
of seasonal rangers that the Park Service needs to hire to restore
staffing capacity to 2010 levels.
Under H.R. 2822, less than 16 percent of the funds requested for the
National Park Service's centennial are provided. By underfunding the
Centennial Challenge, this bill misses the opportunity to allow the
American public to support their parks through matching donations.
The National Park's Civil Rights initiative fares only slightly
better, with just 19 percent of the request funded. It is our
responsibility to act now to preserve the stories and monuments of the
civil rights movement.
The Land and Water Conservation Fund is cut by more than 25 percent
below the FY 2015-enacted level, continuing the pattern of
shortchanging conservation.
Wildlife programs are underfunded as well, with cuts or flat funding
to programs that assist in the recovery of species or help to prevent
their listing in the first place. Funding decisions such as these set
up the Endangered Species Act to fail.
However, the most significant and devastating cuts are again targeted
at the Environmental Protection Agency. The bill cuts the EPA by $718
million from the FY 2015-enacted level, a 9 percent cut. This is on top
of the nearly 20 percent cut the Agency has received over the past 4
years.
The air every American breathes and the water every American family
drinks are all at risk by the funding cuts and policy attacks in this
bill. When the majority says it wants to rein in the EPA, what they are
really doing is denying the protection of our air and water.
The consequences of abandoning public health and environmental
protection will be negatively felt in communities across this Nation.
Why? Because this bill cuts the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water
Revolving Funds by more than half a billion dollars. The revolving
funds are part of a partnership with our communities to build and
repair infrastructure that protects America's drinking water and
prevents sewage from contaminating our water. And when we invest in
these water systems, we are also creating jobs in communities all
across the country.
Earlier this month, the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior
released their latest summer fire forecast, which showed that fire
costs are likely to exceed FY 2015-enacted levels by nearly $300
million.
Wildland fires burn up 12 percent, or $3.9 billion, of the bill's
allocation. And without some relief, these numbers will only continue
to grow.
In just the past 3 years, we have had to make up a total of a
billion-dollar shortfall that forced agencies to borrow funds from
other accounts to pay for fire costs. We know the answer to this
problem. Many of us are cosponsors of Mr. Simpson's bill, H.R. 167, to
treat a portion of these wildfire costs as they are--disasters.
Yet as problematic as the funding decisions in this bill are, what is
even more troubling are the more than two dozen problem legislative
riders and funding limitations contained in the bill, with seven of
these being new this year.

These provisions do not belong in the bill. These are proposals that
should be moved through the authorizing committee, where open,
transparent, and thoughtful debate can take place.
The riders the majority have hung on this bill undermine our Nation's
bedrock environmental laws, endanger public health and safety, and deny
the impact that climate change is having on our planet.
Several of these riders would require that Agency scientists and
procedures be ignored, saying that they ``can't be trusted.'' Yet other
provisions would overturn Federal court decisions and limit judicial
review.
As lawmakers, we create the legislation that guides our Nation, but
my colleagues in the majority seem to need a reminder that we are only
one of three branches of government. Clearly, we are the most important
branch. But the other two branches have jobs to do as well.
For a majority that complains about the Federal rulemaking process,
it is

[[Page H4724]]

surprising to see that the bill contains directives that certain
Federal rules be issued. It would appear that the majority is okay with
Federal rulemaking, but only as long as the rules are the ones they
want.
With the inadequate funding and special interest provisions, I share
the administration's concerns about this bill. I will submit the
Statement of Administration Policy on H.R. 2822, which is eight pages
and includes a veto threat.

Statement of Administration Policy

H.R. 2822--Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016

(Rep. Rogers, R-KY)

The Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R.
2822, making appropriations for the Department of the
Interior, Environment, and related agencies for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 2016, and for other purposes. The
bill drastically underfunds core Department of the Interior
programs as well as the Environmental Protection Agency's
operating budget, which supports nationwide protection of
human health and our vital air, water and land resources.
Funding levels in the bill would prevent investments that
reduce future costs to taxpayers by facilitating increased
energy development and maintaining facilities and
infrastructure in national parks, refuges, forests, public
lands, and Indian Country. They would make it harder for
States and businesses to plan and execute changes that would
decrease carbon pollution and address the challenges the
Nation faces from climate change. They would also reduce
support for partnerships and effective collaboration with
States, local governments and private entities on efforts to
restore and conserve natural resources. Further, the bill
includes numerous highly problematic ideological provisions
that have no place in funding legislation. These provisions
threaten to undermine the ability of States and communities
to address climate change and protect a resource that is
essential to America's health--clean water, as well as the
most basic protections for America's special places and the
people and wildlife that rely on them. If the President were
presented with H.R. 2822, his senior advisors would recommend
that he veto the bill.
Enacting H.R. 2822 and adhering to the congressional
Republican budget's overall spending limits for fiscal year
(FY) 2016 would hurt our economy and shortchange investments
in middle-class priorities. Sequestration was never intended
to take effect: rather, it was supposed to threaten such
drastic cuts to both defense and non-defense funding that
policymakers would be motivated to come to the table and
reduce the deficit through smart, balanced reforms. The
Republican framework would bring base discretionary funding
for both non-defense and defense for FY 2016 to the lowest
real levels in a decade. Compared to the President's Budget,
the cuts would result in tens of thousands of the Nation's
most vulnerable children losing access to Head Start,
millions fewer workers receiving job training and employment
services, and drastic cuts to research awards and grants,
along with other impacts that would hurt the economy, the
middle class, and Americans working hard to reach the middle
class.
Sequestration funding levels would also put our national
security at unnecessary risk, not only through pressures on
defense spending, but also through pressures on State, USAID,
Homeland Security, and other non-defense programs that help
keep us safe. More broadly, the strength of our economy and
the security of our Nation are linked. That is why the
President has been clear that he is not willing to lock in
sequestration going forward, nor will he accept fixes to
defense without also fixing non-defense.
The President's senior advisors would recommend that he
veto H.R. 2822 and any other legislation that implements the
current Republican budget framework, which blocks the
investments needed for our economy to compete in the future.
The Administration looks forward to working with the Congress
to reverse sequestration for defense and non-defense
priorities and offset the cost with commonsense spending and
tax expenditure cuts, as Members of Congress from both
parties have urged.
The Administration would like to take this opportunity to
share additional views regarding the Committee's version of
the bill.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

EPA Operating Budget. The Administration disagrees strongly
with the bill's reduction to EPA's operating budget by $474
million, or 13 percent, compared to the FY 2016 Budget
request. This reduced level of funding would significantly
undermine implementation of the Clean Power Plan and the
recently finalized Clean Water Rule. The Clean Power Plan is
a flexible and practical approach to addressing the risks of
climate change by reducing carbon pollution from the electric
power sector, the largest source of carbon pollution in the
United States. Climate change is not only an environmental
challenge, it is also an economic, public health, and
national security challenge. Unabated climate change is
projected to hamper economic growth in the United States and
put the health and well-being of the Nation at risk from
extreme weather events, wildland fire, poor air quality, and
illnesses transmitted by food, water, and disease carriers
such as mosquitos and ticks. Failing to address climate
change would also exacerbate poverty and contribute to
environmental degradation in developing countries,
potentially resulting in resource shortages, political
instability, and conflict. Meanwhile, the bill also reduces
funding to implement the recently finalized Clean Water Rule
that would ensure waters protected under the Clean Water Act
are more precisely defined and predictably determined. By
delaying implementation of this rule, business and industry
face a more costly, difficult, and slower permitting process.
State Categorical Grants. The Administration opposes the
$118 million reduction to State and Tribal Categorical grants
compared to the FY 2016 Budget request. Often, States and
Tribes implement environmental programs through delegated
authorities. However, the bill reduces these grants to States
and Tribes to carry out activities such as water quality
permitting, air monitoring, and hazardous waste management
programs. In addition, the bill reduces funding for
brownfields projects by $35 million, or 32 percent, from the
FY 2016 Budget request. This reduced level of funding
severely limits opportunities for local communities to
revitalize their contaminated lands to improve environmental
quality and spark economic redevelopment.
State Revolving Funds (SRFs). The Administration objects to
the funding levels provided for EPA's Clean Water and
Drinking Water SRFs. The bill reduces SRF funding by a
combined $527 million from the FY 2016 Budget request,
reducing necessary support to help communities finance water
infrastructure improvements, resulting in approximately 200
fewer projects being funded nationally.
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Limits for Power Plants. The
Administration strongly objects to section 428 of the bill,
which would prohibit the use of funds to propose, finalize,
implement or enforce carbon pollution standards for fossil
fuel-fired electric generating units that are the largest
source of carbon pollution in the United States. The bill
seeks to derail Administration efforts to address under
section 111 of the Clean Air Act the urgent economic,
public health, and national security impacts of unabated
climate change. Failure to reduce the utility sector's
carbon footprint places the Nation at risk from extreme
weather events, wildland fire, poor air quality, global
instability, accelerated environmental degradation, and
illnesses transmitted by food, water, and disease carriers
such as mosquitos and ticks.
Clean Water Act (CWA). The Administration believes that the
CWA provisions in the bill undermine efforts to protect
America's clean water resources, which are critical to
American families and businesses. The Administration strongly
objects to section 422 of the bill in particular, which would
disrupt the Administration's current efforts to clarify the
scope of CWA, hamstring future regulatory efforts, and create
significant ambiguity regarding existing regulations and
guidance.
Social Cost of Carbon (SCC). The Administration regards the
SCC as an essential component of the environmental rulemaking
process and opposes the Congress' interference with the
Interagency Working Group's (IWG) development of the SCC. The
Administration strongly objects to section 437 of the bill,
which would force the IWG to revise the SCC using only the
discount rates and ``domestic'' SCC values stated in
Executive Order 12866 and Office of Management and Budget
Circular A-4. This revision would ignore the trans-boundary
movement of carbon, fail to capture key costs of carbon
emissions, and disrupt dozens of upcoming rules that would
use the SCC to monetize carbon reduction benefits.
Limitations on Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP)
Program under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The Administration
objects to section 435 of the bill, which would block the
finalization, implementation, and enforcement of a rule to
prohibit certain uses of climate super-pollutants known as
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Domestic action to reduce use of
HFCs is consistent with U.S. advocacy for addressing HFCs on
a global basis, such as through an amendment to the Montreal
Protocol.
National Ocean Policy. The Administration objects to
section 425 of the bill, which prohibits any funding provided
in the bill from being used to implement the marine planning
components of the National Ocean Policy. This provision would
prohibit the Department of the Interior (DOI) and EPA from
participating in marine and coastal planning efforts, a
process to better determine how the ocean, the Nation's
coasts, and the Great Lakes are managed in an efficient
manner.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) Financial Assurance. The
Administration objects to section 427 of the bill, which
prohibits the use of funds to develop, propose, finalize, and
implement financial responsibility requirements under CERCLA
108(b). On May 19, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit ordered EPA to develop an
expedited schedule for financial responsibility rules for the
hardrock mining industry and for three other industries. This
provision would severely limit EPA's ability to develop these
rules in a timely manner and abrogates EPA's responsibilities
laid out in CERCLA 108(b).
Classification of Forest Biomass Fuels as Carbon-Neutral.
The Administration objects

[[Page H4725]]

to the bill's representation of forest biomass as
categorically ``carbon-neutral.'' This language conflicts
with existing EPA policies on biogenic CO2 and
interferes with the position of States that do not apply the
same policies to forest biomass as other renewable fuels like
solar or wind. This language stands in contradiction to a
wide-ranging consensus on policies and best available science
from EPA's own independent Science Advisory Board, numerous
technical studies, many States, and various other
stakeholders.
e-Manifest. The Administration objects to the elimination
of funding for e-Manifest development, EPA's system for
electronically tracking the transport of hazardous waste.
While the Administration acknowledges the concern about the
pace of development of the e-Manifest, eliminating the
requested $7 million in funding at this time would jeopardize
EPA's ongoing progress to develop the system and begin
operations in the coming years.
Lead Test Kits. The Administration objects to section 426
of the bill that would disrupt EPA's current activities under
the 2008 Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting rule until EPA
approves a commercially available ``improved'' lead paint
test kit. This provision would undermine EPA's efforts to
protect sensitive populations from exposure to lead, a known
toxin to children and developing fetuses, during home
renovation projects.

Department of the Interior (DOI)

Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Topline. The Administration
opposes the $159 million, or 5 percent, reduction to BIA as
compared to the FY 2016 Budget request. This funding level
would limit DOI's ability to make key investments in
education and wrap-around services to support Native youth,
eliminating all increases to post-secondary scholarships and
$10 million for education program enhancement funds to allow
Bureau of Indian Education to drive school improvement and
reforms. The bill reduces funding for initiatives aimed at
supporting tribal self-determination through the creation of
a one-stop portal to facilitate access to Federal resources
and funding to address data gaps in Indian Country, and the
creation of an Office of Indian Affairs Policy, Program
Evaluation, and Data to support effective, data-driven,
tribal policy making and program implementation. In addition,
this bill eliminates all increases to natural resources
management on tribal lands, including funds to help tribal
communities prepare for and respond to the impacts of climate
change.
National Park Service (NPS) Centennial. The Administration
opposes funding levels provided for the NPS Centennial. The
bill fails to provide adequate funding to prepare for the
Centennial in 2016, resulting in the delay of roughly 70
percent of line-item park construction projects and 36
percent of repair and rehabilitation projects, and forgoes
millions in matching private donations. The bill also fails
to provide funding for engaging youth and cultivating the
next generation of conservation-minded individuals, including
funding for transportation assistance to students from Title
I schools.
Onshore Inspection Fees. The bill does not include a
proposal in the FY 2016 Budget request to institute a new
onshore oil and gas inspection fee program. The proposal,
which is similar to the program already in place for offshore
operations, would cover the cost of inspection activities and
reduce the net cost to taxpayers of operating the Bureau of
Land Management's (BLM) oil and gas program. Failure to adopt
the new fees and associated funding would hamper the BLM's
ability to protect human safety, conserve energy resources,
facilitate the proper reporting of oil and gas production,
and ensure environmental requirements are being followed in
all phases of development.
State and Tribal Wildlife Grants. The Administration
opposes the 15 percent reduction to State and Tribal Wildlife
Grants compared to the FY 2016 Budget request. This important
program allows States and Tribes, key partners in
conservation, to strategically protect wildlife and conserve
habitat in a way that complements Federal investments and
yields better results for the public.
Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT). The bill provides $452
million for PILT, which the Administration has proposed to
fund through a separate mandatory appropriation in line with
its previous congressional enactment. While the
Administration appreciates the Committee's support for PILT,
inclusion of these funds in the bill comes at the expense of
all other programs funded by the bill.
Carcieri Land into Trust. The bill fails to include the
provision in the FY 2016 Budget request to clarify and
reaffirm the Secretary of the Interior's authority to acquire
land in trust under the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA). In
Carcieri v. Salazar, 555 U.S. 397 (2009), the Supreme Court
held that the Secretary could acquire land in trust under the
IRA only for tribes that were ``under Federal jurisdiction''
in 1934. A legislative solution would help achieve the goals
of the IRA and tribal self-determination by clarifying that
DOI's authority under the law applies to all tribes, whether
recognized in 1934 or after. Such legislation would be
consistent with the longstanding policy of assisting Tribes
in establishing and protecting a land base sufficient to
allow them to provide for the health, welfare, and safety of
tribal members, and in treating all tribes equally for
purposes of setting aside lands for tribal communities.
Hydraulic Fracturing: Section 439 of the bill would block
DOI from implementing, administering or enforcing the Bureau
of Land Management's recently-finalized Hydraulic Fracturing
rule. This would leave the agency reliant on 30-year old
requirements and prevent it from taking key steps to improve
the safety of oil and gas drilling activities and improve
opportunities for BLM to coordinate standards and processes
with States and Tribes to reduce administrative costs and
improve efficiency.
Stream Buffer Regulation. Section 423 would prohibit DOI's
Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation, and Enforcement from
updating 30-year-old stream protection regulations to reflect
modern science and technology and better protect people and
the environment, provide industry more certainty, and address
recent court decisions.
Hunting, Fishing and Recreational Shooting. Sections 421
and 424 would substantially impair the enforcement of a
longstanding ban on the use of lead ammunition in the hunting
of migratory waterfowl, and would complicate in other ways
the overall implementation of hunting, fishing, and
recreational shooting on public lands.
Wildlife Trafficking. Section 120 would interfere with
ongoing Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) actions to combat
wildlife trafficking, curb the poaching of African Elephants,
and restrict trade in ivory, which would impair U.S.
leadership in the global fight against ivory poaching.
Endangered Species Act Restrictions. Sections 117, 121, and
122 of the bill undercut the Endangered Species Act by
limiting the ability of the FWS to properly protect, based on
the best available science, a number of species, including
the greater sage grouse, northern long-eared bat, and certain
gray wolf populations. Language provisions, like those
affecting the sage grouse, would only create additional
uncertainty and undermine unprecedented efforts to conserve
the sagebrush landscape and the Western way of life.
Federal Acknowledgement of American Indian Tribes. Language
under the heading ``Bureau of Indian Affairs, Administrative
Provisions'' in the bill would block DOI from finalizing,
implementing, administering, or enforcing the
Administration's proposed Federal acknowledgment rule,
preventing DOI's effort to improve the regulations governing
the process and criteria by which the Secretary of the
Interior acknowledges an Indian Tribe.

DOI and Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forest Service

Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). The Administration
objects to the drastic reduction of $152 million, or 38
percent, to the requested discretionary funding for DOI and
USDA LWCF programs. LWCF is a cornerstone of Federal
conservation and recreation preservation efforts. This
funding level would severely impede agency capacity to
further protect our Nation's natural heritage. To date, the
LWCF has contributed to the protection of key public lands,
such as Rocky Mountain National Park, Mount Rainier National
Park, and portions of the Appalachian Trail, among others, as
well as State and local recreation projects and important
cultural heritage sites.
Wildland Fire Suppression. The Administration's cap
adjustment for wildfire suppression was not included in this
bill. Continued inaction on this proposal, which has
bipartisan support, would increase the likelihood of
disruptive funding transfers for suppression and away from
the very restoration and fire risk reduction programs that
are meant to restore landscapes and reduce suppression costs
and restore landscapes.
Land Management Operations. The Administration opposes the
$502 million, or 8 percent, reduction to operational funding
to land management agencies, relative to the FY 2016 Budget
request. This reduction would undermine support for the
provision of basic public and business services that support
the long-term health and resilience of national parks,
forests, refuges, and other public lands.
Water Rights on Federal Land. Section 434 prohibits
agencies from conditioning land use authorizations on the
transfer, relinquishment, or impairment of a water right, or
on the acquisition of a water right in the name of the United
States. This language is unnecessary for its intended
purpose, and would preclude land management agencies from
protecting the public interest. The provision would eliminate
the ability of land management agencies to maintain
sufficient water for other congressionally-designated
purposes and ensure water rights are tied to the activities
for which they were developed. These restrictions would also
hamper cooperative work with land users to improve land
conditions, such as range improvements, or conduct habitat
mitigation activities as part of land use agreements.

Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forest Service

Land Management Improvements. The bill provides $357
million for capital improvement and maintenance of the
national forest system, a 5 percent increase from the FY 2016
Budget request. While the Administration supports the capital
improvement and maintenance of the Nation's public forests in
order to increase its health, resilience, and accessibility,
the increase in this bill comes at the expense of other
needed priorities.

Department of Health and Human Services

Indian Health Service (IHS) Topline. The Administration
strongly opposes the reduction to funding for Native American
health

[[Page H4726]]

care programs and facilities of the Indian Health Service
(IHS) by $300 million, or 6 percent, below the FY 2016 Budget
request. This would result in inadequate funding for the
provision of health care to a population that is sicker and
poorer compared to national averages. For example, compared
to the FY 2016 Budget request, the bill reduces funding by
nearly $50 million for Purchased and Referred Care, a program
that supports health care not available in IHS and tribal
facilities, which would exacerbate existing levels of denied
care and waiting lists for services.
Contract Support Costs. The Administration objects to the
limitation in funding for tribal Contract Support Costs (CSC)
for BIA and IHS. Specifically, the bill would limit funding
for CSC that could perpetuate the funding issues described in
the Supreme Court's Salazar v. Ramah Navajo Chapter decision.
The Congress should pursue a long-term solution for CSC
appropriations, providing an increase in funding in FY 2016
as part of a transition to a new three-year mandatory funding
stream in FY 2017, as proposed in the President's Budget.

Other Provisions

Smithsonian Institution. The bill reduces funding for the
Smithsonian Institution by $116 million, or 12 percent, below
the FY 2016 Budget request--a reduction that can be expected
to reduce public access to the Smithsonian as well as
increase safety concerns through delays in planned
renovations. With over 30 million visits to Smithsonian
facilities recorded in 2014, it is important to ensure the
museums, galleries, National Zoological Park, and nine
research facilities that make up the world's largest museum
and research complex remain open, maintained, and available
to the generations of Americans who make use of this unique
institution each year. Specifically, the bill reductions
would delay renovation for the National Air and Space Museum,
where the museum has had to establish temporary covered
walkways to protect the public from potential falling debris
from its facade, and would reduce operating hours for the
museums, including the new National Museum of African
American History and Culture.
Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA
Act). The Administration urges the Congress to fully fund the
FY 2016 Budget requests for DOI and EPA to implement the DATA
Act. This funding would support efforts to provide more
transparent Federal spending data, such as updating
information technology systems, changing business processes,
and employing a uniform procurement instrument identifier.
U.S. Digital Service Team. The Administration urges the
Congress to fully fund the FY 2016 Budget requests for DOI
and EPA to develop U.S. Digital Service teams. This funding
would support managing the agency's digital services that
have the greatest impact to citizens and businesses.

Constitutional Concerns

Several provisions in the bill raise separation of powers
concerns.
The Administration looks forward to working with the
Congress as the FY 2016 appropriations process moves forward.

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, we owe it to our constituents to be good
stewards of the environment, to be protectors of public health, and to
be defenders of the public good. We can do better than what this bill
offers. H.R. 2822 falls short of our responsibilities to present and
future generations. As such, I cannot support the bill in its current
form.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to yield such time as he
may consume to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), the full
committee chairman.
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for
yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the fiscal year 2016 Department of
the Interior and Environment Appropriations bill. This is the eighth of
the 12 individual bills that have made it to the floor. That is a
record pace, by the way. It is the fastest that these bills have come
before the House since at least 1974, when the Budget Control Act came
into being.
This bill, as the chairman said, provides just over $30 billion in
discretionary funding for programs that preserve and nurture our
Nation's unique natural and cultural heritage. This fulfills our
responsibility to the American taxpayers to provide funding for these
important programs within a smart and sustainable budget.
Our responsibility to the American taxpayers, of course, doesn't end
there. The people of this Nation expect their government to act in a
way that fosters economic development and job creation. This current
administration has been neglecting that duty, instead choosing to push
a regulatory agenda that would create an environment hostile to
economic growth, that would put our energy independence at risk, and
that could cost thousands of hard-working Americans their jobs.
So this bill takes important steps to stop this harmful executive
overreach. First and foremost, we limit funding for the Environmental
Protection Agency, cutting its funding by 9 percent from last year.
The bill also prohibits the EPA from implementing a litany of its
egregious, expensive regulations, including applying new greenhouse gas
regulations for power plants, updating existing ozone regulations, and
changing the definitions of ``navigable waters'' and ``fill material,''
all of which could spell disaster for our economy.

{time} 1315

The bill also prevents the Bureau of Land Management from hampering
economic growth by halting increases in oil and gas inspection fees and
from burdening ranchers with higher grazing fees.
Provisions like these will help get the government out of the way of
growth, preventing the overregulation and overtaxation of American
business and industry, and keeping down manufacturing costs and utility
bills for families across the country.
In addition, the bill also focuses funding on other important
Department of the Interior related programs. For instance, the bill
creates a new $30 million program to help accelerate the reclamation of
abandoned mine lands, boosting local community redevelopment.
The bill also fulfills our moral and legal obligations to American
Indians and Alaska Natives, increasing funding for programs that will
help improve education systems, health facilities, and other
infrastructure.
The bill prioritizes the prevention of and preparation for wildland
fires, increasing funding for these programs billwide by $52 million.
Mr. Chairman, this is a fine appropriations bill that we have before
us today. I want to commend Chairman Calvert for his good work on this
bill. He, the ranking member, and the subcommittee have done a thorough
job on the bill, and I am proud to support it. I also want to thank the
staff for their work to bring this bill to the floor today.
This is the maiden voyage, Mr. Chairman, of this cardinal, this new
chairman, the new chairman of this subcommittee. This is his first
bill, and it is a good one. I want to salute him and his staff for
doing a great job in putting together a bill that was tough to put
together. Congratulations to you.
Before I close, Mr. Chairman, I want to take a moment to recognize
one of my staff members, Mike Robinson, who will be moving on to
greener pastures next week.
Mike started working for me nearly 20 years ago and has had several
tenures in my personal office. Four years ago, he joined the
Appropriations Committee, the front office, as coalitions and Member
services director.
Many of our colleagues have gotten a chance to know Mike over these
past 4 years. He has answered your questions. He has helped you offer
amendments. He has helped guide dozens of appropriations bills to
passage. He has been an integral part of the staff over these years,
and we will miss him greatly when he departs.
Thank you, Mike, for all of your hard work. We are very grateful to
you.
Mr. Chairman, this is an appropriations bill that puts our Nation's
economy first. It preserves the role of the Federal Government, making
sure the government is doing its job well, not in a way that intrudes
into the lives of American businesses or the American people, but in a
way that encourages our economy to grow and thrive, and I urge my
colleagues to support the bill.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from
New York (Mrs. Lowey), the ranking member of the Appropriations
Committee.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Chairman Calvert;
Chairman Rogers; as well as my good friend Betty McCollum, who is doing
an outstanding job in her first year as ranking member of the
subcommittee; and all the hard-working staff on both sides of the
aisle.
However, while I appreciate the chairman's willingness to accommodate
some Democratic priorities, this

[[Page H4727]]

is the latest in a series of bills that drastically shortchanges job-
creating investments and vital environmental protections, while
carrying a wish list of special interest giveaways that hurt hard-
working American families' health and safety.
The President proposed to end sequestration through more reasonable
and realistic budgeting 4 months ago, but Republicans have yet to
engage on finding a workable solution. How much longer do we have to
play this charade, the Republican shutdown strategy, before the House
considers bills that could be enacted?
Refusing to adopt a sufficient overall allocation for discretionary
investments has led to a bill that severely underfunds far too many
priorities.
The EPA would be slashed $1.17 billion below the President's request,
$718 million below the 2015 enacted level. Such a draconian cut would
take EPA investments back to 1997 levels.
Capital programs are dramatically underfunded, with Indian Health
facilities receiving $173 million less than the President's request.
Over half a billion dollars in cuts to the State revolving funds
endanger our Nation's water infrastructure, cutting 32,000 construction
jobs on 207 projects, risking public health with fewer water and
drinking water projects.
The Land and Water Conservation Fund, which conserves irreplaceable
lands and improves outdoor recreation opportunities, would be cut by 30
percent below the current level.
Unsurprisingly, the majority seeks to dismantle critical
environmental protections in the bill that are supposed to advance
environmental initiatives.
In a demonstration of solidarity with climate change deniers and the
coal industry, the majority would prevent the administration from
advancing new rules to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Despite the fact that it harmonizes existing activities to protect
the environment, 2.8 million ocean industry jobs, $282 billion in GDP
generated by ocean industries in coastal States, the National Ocean
Policy's implementation would be blocked.
Once again, the majority has waged war on the Endangered Species Act,
placing politics above science and jeopardizing the protection of
precious species, including wolves.
Instead of allowing the United States to lead the world to end the
trade of ivory, the Fish and Wildlife Service's efforts would be rolled
back.
Given the number of unnecessary riders, it is particularly
disappointing that the majority didn't include our colleague, Mr.
Simpson's wildfire bill, an excellent proposal that would improve our
ability to prepare for and respond to disasters.
Democrats are more than willing to find a balanced and fiscally
responsible way to lift the sequester that is strangling our
investments in America's future and invest in a stronger defense,
better infrastructure, and bigger paycheck for America's hard-working
families.
I hope that, as we move forward, this bill makes those investments
and sheds unnecessary policy changes. I urge my colleagues to oppose
this misguided bill.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to
the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Jenkins), our new hard-working
member.
Mr. JENKINS of West Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I want to express my
appreciation to your hard work and to the ranking member, to your
staff, and all who have worked so hard on this legislation.
This bill is notable for what it funds and what it doesn't fund.
West Virginians, we love our clean water. We love clean air. We love
our mountains and our forests and our rivers.
What West Virginians do not love is this President's war on coal.
This week, petitions from 26,000 West Virginians were delivered to my
office asking the President to stop the war on coal. West Virginia's
jobs and our citizens' livelihoods are on the line. The President has
requested hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on new regulations,
programs, and an army of lawyers to defend his illegal regulatory
overreach.

Our State has lost 7,000 coal jobs in just the last 3 years of this
administration. Today, we say ``no'' to funding the war on coal, ``no''
to regulatory overreach. We do cut the EPA's budget by more than $1
billion from what was requested. We halt harmful, job-killing rules on
new and existing coal-fired power plants.
We say no to changing the definition of navigable waters and fill
material, no to imposing ozone regulations that are simply
unachievable, and no to imposing the stream buffer zone rule.
The Administrator of the EPA even refused to come to West Virginia to
talk to our communities and hard-working coal miners, but instead, when
she refused, I brought coal miners to the Appropriations Committee to
tell their story, and it was a powerful story.
Today, I am here with 26,000 other voices to make sure they are heard
here at the Capitol.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership. Thank you for the hard
work.
I would appreciate a ``yes'' vote on this important legislation
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Kilmer), a member of the subcommittee who is very
valued.
Mr. KILMER. Mr. Chairman, I want to begin by thanking the
subcommittee chairman, my friend from California, and the ranking
member, my friend from Minnesota, for the hard work that they have put
into today's bill.
As a new member of the committee, I have gotten to see firsthand the
enormous amount of work that went into the product that we have before
us today, and it is, frankly, a testament to the hard work of the
Appropriations Committee staff that we have been able to get to this
point.
I want to begin by expressing support for a number of really
important provisions in the bill that I think are critical points of
progress. In a very tough budget environment, this bill boosts funding
for the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service,
increasing the Federal commitment to addressing the needs of Indian
Country.
Coming from timber country, I can say that there is also a very
strong effort here to ensure that the Forest Service can responsibly
increase harvest levels on our national forests, as well as supporting
new tools, such as collaboratives, that have the potential to bring
folks together in a way that reduces the litigation risk surrounding
these projects.
Of course, I would love for us to be able include in this bill Mr.
Simpson's legislation addressing wildfire disaster funding. I have
heard from so many people in my neck of the woods just how important it
is that we get this taken care of it.
The bill also provides essential resources to support recovery
efforts in the Puget Sound. As both the chairman and ranking member of
the subcommittee know, this is big deal, both for our natural
environment and for our economy; and I will continue working with them
to make sure we are dedicating the needed resources for this critical
effort.
Unfortunately, I will have to oppose the bill before us today. This
bill comes in at $2 billion below the President's budget request. It
would cut funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund. It fails to
make needed investments in the National Park System and takes a meat
axe to the Environmental Protection Agency and the programs that
protect clean water.
Mr. Chairman, to conclude, let me just say we need to come together
in a bipartisan way to end sequestration, to remove these budget caps,
and to work on bipartisan bills that make the investments our Nation
needs to boost economic development and protect our natural resources
for future generations.
I hope we do that, and I am eager to be a partner in doing that.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Carter) for the purpose of engaging in a colloquy.
Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I want to thank
you and the Appropriations Committee for its hard work on bringing this
important legislation to the floor.
As you know, we have been working with your staff on an issue of
great importance to the Port of Savannah, which services 40 percent of
American consumers.
Since 1940, the National Park Service has leased a small parcel of
land on

[[Page H4728]]

Cockspur Island within the Fort Pulaski National Monument to the
Savannah Bar Pilots. The bar pilots help navigate large ships through
the Savannah River channel to the port and have done so from Cockspur
Island since as far as back as the 1730s.
In 2011, at the request of the Park Service, Congress passed
legislation to change the relationship between the bar pilots and the
Park Service. With enactment of the Fort Pulaski National Monument
Lease Authorization Act, Public Law 112-69, the relationship between
the bar pilots and Park Service was shifted from a series of special
use permits to a noncompete lease of up to 10 years.

{time} 1330

At the time of consideration of the legislation, the Congressional
Budget Office estimated the annual lease fee for the bar pilots would
be $25,000, a slight increase from their existing rate based on a 2008
appraisal conducted by the Park Service.
It has come to my attention that the Park Service is attempting to
use passage of the legislation to increase the lease fee by as much as
tenfold. This is extremely problematic because such an increase could
threaten to force the bar pilots off Cockspur Island.
Simply given their history on the island, the idea of forcing the bar
pilots to relocate is inappropriate, in and of itself. However, this is
more troubling when you realize that pilotage services are required by
law, so vessels are required to use their services to move in and out
of the Port of Savannah, and there is no other known location from
which pilots could operate more efficiently.
Moving the facility could lead to longer transit times for vessels,
increased safety risk in foul weather, delays in ship movement, and
greater fuel usage for pilots and vessels waiting to call on the Port
of Savannah.
The resulting environmental and economic harm would significantly
increase costs and could threaten growth at the Port of Savannah just
as the Federal Government embarks on the construction phase of the $706
million Savannah Harbor Expansion Project.
The legislation passed in 2011 was intended to create a long-term fix
to the permitting issue, not to create an outlet by which the National
Park Service could continuously raise fees to exorbitant levels.
Mr. Chairman, I would request your support of our efforts to find an
equitable and timely resolution to this matter that reflects Congress'
intent and establishes a process for ensuring that the pilots are
charged only fair market value in line with previous National Park
Service appraisals and that they are able to continue operating from
their current location on Cockspur Island.
Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman from Georgia for bringing this
matter to my attention. I share your concerns that this change could
negatively impact the growth at the Port of Savannah just as work
begins on the expansion project.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. CALVERT. I yield myself an additional 30 seconds.
I would note that, in testimony before the Senate, National Park
Service Associate Director Stephen Whitesell testified that the
Savannah bar pilots have operated ``with virtually no adverse impact on
park resources, on the visitor experience, or on park operations.''
The legislation that passed at the request of the Park Service in
2011 was supposed to simply improve the legal basis through which the
bar pilots and the Park Service entered into a contract.
I am committed to continuing to work with you to find an equitable
and timely solution to this matter that ensures the Fort Pulaski
National Monument Lease Authorization Act is appropriately implemented
and that the bar pilots are not forced to move from Cockspur Island.
Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your attention to
this issue and for your service in shepherding this important
legislation through the legislative process.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), a colleague of mine on the Appropriations Committee.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the gentlewoman from Minnesota,
Ranking Member McCollum, as well as Chairman Ken Calvert of California
for working with me to include important language relative to the
National Park Service.
Specifically, the report addresses a threat to a significant part of
the history of the region I represent, the Battle of Lake Erie that
paved the way for America's expansion beyond 13 colonies, commemorated
by Perry's Victory and International Peace Memorial at Put-In-Bay,
Ohio.
Perry's Memorial is at the heart of coastal tourism in Ohio,
attracting 130,000 visitors just last year, and more than double as
many people were reached through their educational activities.
Despite its popularity, this site has been unnecessarily targeted for
consolidation. The idea that resources and, more importantly,
management of this popular site would shift to a noncontiguous, smaller
installation in a different State is both concerning and, frankly,
quite puzzling.
Reporting requirements included with the bill are there to ensure
that Perry's Memorial will continue operating as a stand-alone site.
I would also ask the chairman and ranking member to continue working
with me to address this need moving forward to ensure that this
misguided consolidation plan is stopped.
Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. KAPTUR. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I am certainly happy to continue to work with
the gentlewoman from Minnesota and to address her concerns as this
process continues.
Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman very much, and I thank the ranking
member.
I yield to the gentlewoman from Minnesota.
Ms. McCOLLUM. The gentlewoman from Ohio has my commitment to work
with the chairman to resolve it.
Ms. KAPTUR. I thank both the chairman and ranking member.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Gibbs).
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2822, the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2016.
This bill responsibly ensures the EPA's regulatory overreach is
checked by Congress. Key provisions included will stop the EPA's most
burdensome and damaging regulations and encourage opportunities for
water infrastructure investment.
This bill ensures that the EPA cannot use resources to expand the
definitions of the ``waters of the United States'' and ``fill
material'' beyond what Congress wrote in the Clean Water Act. As the
King v. Burwell case just taught us, this administration is eager to
redefine words to suit their purposes. This House must stand up to
them, and in this bill, we are.
These key provisions are excellent backstops for ensuring the EPA's
clean water rule does not move forward in implementation because this
rule is nothing more than a Federal power grab and a substantial
expansion of Clean Water Act jurisdiction. Even the agencies
implementing this rule have concerns about the clarity of its changes.
I am also pleased to see the committee supports an integrated
planning approach to help communities affordably manage and meet their
burdensome regulatory obligations under the Clean Water Act.
Communities face enormous financial pressure to have quality services
for its residents, including clean water. This approach can potentially
save ratepayers millions of dollars while focusing clean water
investments in a way that ensures the greatest water quality benefit.
Lastly, this bill encourages the implementation of the bipartisan
pilot program, Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act, better
known as WIFIA, that was authorized under WRRDA in 2014.
Provisions offered in this legislation will set the stage for EPA to
implement WIFIA loans in fiscal years 2017 to provide credit assistance
for water resource infrastructure projects and act as a complement to
the major source of Federal investment in water

[[Page H4729]]

infrastructure, the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, known as the SRF.
This program will provide communities increased options and flexibility
for funding their critical water infrastructure projects.
I thank Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for recognizing
the importance of these provisions and for putting together a bill that
sets appropriate levels for agencies and programs.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Maine (Ms. Pingree), a thoughtful and valued member of the
subcommittee.
Ms. PINGREE. I thank the ranking member for yielding me time and for
the nice comments and the ability to work with her on the committee. I
do appreciate the work of the Chair and the ranking member very much on
this bill.
Mr. Chair, there are so many important programs that are funded in
the Department of Interior Appropriations bill. I am proud to be on
this committee and particularly to serve on this subcommittee.
Today's bill was written by a very good chairman in conjunction with
a great ranking member, but at the end of the day, the funding levels
are still too low. We cannot get bipartisan support on this bill when
there are not enough dollars to go around. The reality is we need to
get rid of the sequester, roll back the Budget Control Act caps, and
pass these bills with funding levels that move our country forward, not
backward.
As so many of my colleagues have stated, when adjusted for inflation,
this bill provides less than the appropriated levels in FY 2005. That
is just not sufficient for the vital programs in this bill, programs
that monitor and protect the water we drink and the air we breathe and
regulate the products we use.
There are some highlights in today's bill, such as the Bureau of
Indian Education construction budget and the Forest Legacy program and
the international forestry accounts, and I am glad to see them there,
but there is so much more to be concerned about.
I am deeply disappointed in the cut to the Fish and Wildlife Service
endangered species listing program, which is cut by 50 percent, and the
overall Land and Water Conservation Fund cuts. This overall Land and
Water Conservation Fund level is 20 percent less than last year, and
that is very frustrating, knowing how important this program is to
every single congressional district in the country.
I am concerned that programs such as the Aquatic Animal Drug Approval
Partnership Program are funded at last year's level--and no higher--
when we really need to understand the diseases that affect our fish and
establish treatment options to protect them.
The U.S. Geological Survey that funds critical research programs and
the monitoring of climate change, stormwater gauges, earthquake and
weather research is also funded only at last year's level.
The National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the
Humanities were denied the additional resources they requested,
including funds that would have been used to increase programming for
our veterans and wounded warriors.
For those of us in Maine who are so proud of our national park,
Acadia National Park, and are strong supporters of parks across the
country, there is simply not enough funding. There are not enough
dollars for the improvements and maintenance that is needed in any
given year, but particularly needed in this special centennial year.
The National Park centennial is a once in a lifetime opportunity for
us to highlight our parks and help millions of Americans who have not
been to a national park before to see our Nation's greatest treasures.
Again, I recognize completely the position that this subcommittee and
our other subcommittees have been in because of the Budget Control Act
caps, but these programs deserve more.
I look forward to working with our chair and ranking member as this
bill moves forward, to try to improve the areas that still need
attention.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, it is my pleasures to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to
the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Rouzer).
Mr. ROUZER. Mr. Chairman, today, I rise in support of H.R. 2822, the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act of 2016.
It is no secret that the EPA is out of control. I think everybody
across this great land knows that. A few weeks ago, the EPA issued
their final rule to redefine waters of the U.S., completely ignoring
the will of the House and stakeholders all across America.

Under this rule change, waters of the U.S. would now include smaller
bodies of water and even some dry land. In fact, this new definition
would extend the EPA's regulatory reach to seemingly any body of water,
including that water puddled in your ditch after a rain storm. Yes, you
heard me right.
I have heard from small-business owners, farmers, Realtors, and
homebuilders in my district; and they are all concerned about the
negative impact this rule could have--and rightly so. This rule is so
broad that it could very well require them to get permission from a
Federal bureaucrat before acting on their own property.
I commend Chairman Calvert and the other members of the committee for
including language in this appropriations bill to prohibit any funds
from being used to implement this new rule.
I am proud to support this bill, and I encourage my colleagues to do
the same.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time is
left?
The CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota has 9 minutes remaining.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), a valued Member of this body.
Mr. CICILLINE. I thank the gentlewoman, my friend, for yielding.
Mr. Chair, I rise today to oppose this legislation for many reasons
but, in particular, because it vastly underfunds the operation of our
national parks, as well as many other important priorities.
Next August, the National Park Service will celebrate its 100th
anniversary. Our national parks are the envy of the world and serve as
a model for their emphasis on conservation.
The National Park System accounts for more than 400 parks, heritage
areas, monuments, and the historical sites; occupies more than 84
million acres of land in all 50 States; and is home to more than 1,000
endangered or threatened animal species. It is the responsibility of
the National Park Service to preserve these sites so that future
generations may enjoy them.
Our national parks tell a rich story of our stunning landscapes,
natural wonders, and historic sites. From Yosemite National Park in
California to Mammoth Cave--the world's longest known cave system, in
Kentucky--to the Great Smoky Mountains in Tennessee and North Carolina,
our national parks are an essential part of the American fabric and
have been called America's best idea.
This bill appropriates approximately $2.33 billion for the operation
of the National Park System over the next year. This is more than $187
million below the amount that was requested by the President. This
account funds the critical needs of our National Park System, such as
support services for new responsibilities within the system, resource
stewardship, and facilities management.
The National Park System is a significant driver of economic
activity. More than 275 million people visit our national parks each
year. In 2013, it was estimated that every dollar invested in the
National Park Service saw a return of $10.
We need to do better in ensuring that this economic engine and beacon
of American tourism is operating at the highest level so that it can
continue to fulfill its vital economic, environmental, and cultural
role.
Ensuring that the National Park Service has proper funding for
operation ensures that we are able to preserve the story of our
country's development into the Nation that it is today.
In my home State of Rhode Island, the Blackstone River Valley
National Historical Park, created last year after I sponsored
legislation in the House in cooperation with Senator Jack Reed in the
Senate, marks the birthplace of the American industrial revolution.
Sites like old Slater Mill in Pawtucket and the Museum of Work and

[[Page H4730]]

Culture in Woonsocket help tell the story of how America became an
economic superpower.

{time} 1345

It embodies our Nation's economic, environmental, social, and
cultural transformation. In the best spirit of the National Park
Service, the Blackstone River Valley tells a nationally significant
multidimensional story. It illustrates how a beautiful natural
landscape and powerful waterways fueled the industrial revolution and
launched far-reaching changes to our Nation's economy and social
structure.
Blackstone serves only as one example of why it is essential that our
national parks are properly funded and are able to operate in a manner
in which millions of Americans continue to appreciate the storied
history of our Nation.
It is long past time to end sequester and set spending levels that
meet our current responsibilities to be good stewards of the
environment and protect the natural beauty of America.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
The CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 8 minutes remaining.
Mr. CALVERT. I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Nevada (Ms. Titus), a valued Member of this body.
Ms. TITUS. Mr. Chair, I thank the ranking member for yielding me the
time.
You know, my Republican colleagues have made no secret about the fact
that they want to strangle the EPA and undermine its vital
environmental work, but they make little mention of how this bill also
threatens our national security.
I represent Las Vegas, which is the home of a number of critical
radiation response programs, including one of the only two EPA mobile
field labs that can quickly be deployed should a radiological incident
occur anywhere in the West. They can process air, soil, and water
samples.
Because of ongoing budget cuts led by the Republicans, however, EPA
will soon be moving this unit to Montgomery, Alabama, and
decommissioning its other mobile lab. That will leave the whole country
with only one EPA radiation response lab, which will be located over
2,000 miles from Los Angeles, 2,600 miles from Seattle, and 1,800 miles
from Las Vegas and the Nevada test site.
Now, Republicans may be willing to gamble our health and safety to
satisfy their corporate friends, but I am not, and that is why I am
asking my colleagues to vote against this legislation and fund our
agencies at levels necessary to protect our national security.
Mr. CALVERT. I reserve the balance of my time to close.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I do not have an update on the Member
that I am waiting for.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I will just say that this is a good bill.
A lot of work has gone into it, and I would make sure that everyone
votes for it because it is a fine bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, let me thank our Ranking Member, Congresswoman
McCollum, for yielding, and for her tremendous leadership of this
Subcommittee.
Mr. Chair, the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 Interior and Environment bill
before us would place health and safety of all Americans at risk. It
dangerously cuts finding by $246 million from FY2015 levels and is $3.1
billion less than the President's FY2016 request.
The deep cuts to this bill would undermine our air quality, land,
water and conservation funding and will have devastating impacts on all
communities in my home state of California and across the country.
What's worse--this bill slashes funding for the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) by more than 700 million dollars--from FY2015
levels and funds the agency at more than a billion dollars less than
the President's FY2016 request. These profound cuts would significantly
harm the Clean Water Fund and the Safe Drinking Water Fund--critical
programs that ensure the safety of our drinking water and our children.
It also includes $40 million in cuts to the Historic Preservation
Fund (HPP), which would weaken the National Park Services' (NPS)
ability to preserve sites significant in the Civil Rights Movement.
This includes sites like the Selma to Montgomery National Historic
Trail, where many of us participated in the commemoration of the 50th
Anniversary of Bloody Sunday.
Furthermore, there are also egregious policy riders in this bill that
would block clean air protections, such as the EPA's Clean Power Plan.
Too many families, particularly those in low-income, vulnerable
communities, already suffer from poor air quality because of dirty
carbon pollution.
We know that communities of color are disproportionately affected by
pollution-related illnesses, including asthma. According to the
American Academy of Allergy Asthma and Immunology, one in six African
American and one in nine Latino children suffer from asthma.
There are other toxic policy riders that would block the protection
of our imperiled wildlife under the Endangered Species Act, like the
Greater Sage Grouse population.
The Endangered Species Act is the only law that has safeguarded more
than 2,000 plants and wildlife from extinction. This law enjoys broad
support from nearly 85 percent of Americans. And yet here we are again,
with a bill that seeks to undermine decades of, animal protection and
runs counter to vast public support.
Mr. Chair, we need to continue to fight to defend our environment,
address climate change, and make real, meaningful impacts on reducing
greenhouse gas emissions so we protect our environment, our children
and our future.
Unfortunately, the bill before us does just the opposite.
I hope that as this process moves forward, we can address the
insufficient funding allocations and backwards policy riders that would
harm every American and put our precious environment at risk.
The CHAIR. All time for general date has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule.
During consideration of the bill for amendment each amendment shall
be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the
proponent and an opponent and shall not be subject to amendment. No pro
forma amendment shall be in order except that the chair and ranking
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective
designees may offer up to 10 pro forma amendments each at any point for
the purpose of debate. The chair of the Committee of the Whole may
accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the Member
offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the
Congressional Record designated for that purpose. Amendments so printed
shall be considered read.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

H.R. 2822

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the
following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Department of
the Interior, environment, and related agencies for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for other
purposes, namely:

TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

management of lands and resources

For necessary expenses for protection, use, improvement,
development, disposal, cadastral surveying, classification,
acquisition of easements and other interests in lands, and
performance of other functions, including maintenance of
facilities, as authorized by law, in the management of lands
and their resources under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of
Land Management, including the general administration of the
Bureau, and assessment of mineral potential of public lands
pursuant to section 1010(a) of Public Law 96-487 (16 U.S.C.
3150(a)), $1,015,046,000, to remain available until expended,
including all such amounts as are collected from permit
processing fees, as authorized but made subject to future
appropriation by section 35(d)(3)(A)(i) of the Mineral
Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 191), except that amounts from permit
processing fees may be used for any bureau-related expenses
associated with the processing of oil and gas applications
for permits to drill and related use of authorizations; of
which $3,000,000 shall be available in fiscal year 2016
subject to a match by at least an equal amount by the
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation for cost-shared
projects supporting conservation of Bureau lands; and such
funds shall be advanced to the Foundation as a lump-sum grant
without regard to when expenses are incurred.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Poe of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

[[Page H4731]]

Page 2, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $1,000,000)(increased by $1,000,000)''.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman from Texas
and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is really relatively
simple. It takes $1 million from the Bureau of Land Management's
management of lands account and inserts it right back into the account
with the intent of identifying unused land for potential sale to
Americans.
The service charges, deposits, and forfeitures account already has
the authority to dispose of land under the Bureau of Land Management,
but is not specifically appropriated funds.
Today, Mr. Chairman, the United States Government owns and controls
640 million acres of American land. This is 27 percent of the entire
landmass in the United States. If you take all of the countries in
Western Europe, the United States Government, Uncle Sam, owns that much
land and more.
In this poster to my left, the red portions of the poster identify
land that is owned by Uncle Sam, the Federal Government. The white
portions, of course, are land that is owned by private entities.
Included in the red area is Alaska. The red area represents 27 percent
of the landmass in the United States. A lot of this land is unused, and
it is not even managed by the Federal Government. It is just sitting in
these different parts of the country.
This amendment is very simple. It tells the Bureau of Land Management
to study the possibility of selling some of this land back to
Americans. Let Americans own America, not all of it. We are not talking
about the national parks, the national forests. We are not talking
about Yosemite. We are talking about the unused abandoned land in the
United States, but yet it is still owned by this Federal Government.
That is what this amendment does; it is to require a study take
place.
Mr. Chairman, I ask that this amendment be adopted.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Poe of Texas).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Flores

Mr. FLORES. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

On page 2, line 20, insert ``(increased by $5,000,000)''
after the dollar amount.
On page 62, line 8, insert ``(reduced by $12,307,693)''
after the dollar amount.
On page 75, line 14, insert ``(increased by $5,000,000)''
after the dollar amount.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman from Texas
and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. FLORES. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment, along
with my friend from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson) and my friend from
North Dakota (Mr. Cramer).
This amendment will address an energy infrastructure issue that faces
our Nation today, as well as continuing regulatory overreach by the
Environmental Protection Agency.
We all know that the American shale revolution has dramatically
improved our energy security at home and our economic opportunity for
hard-working Americans. The United States is now the number one
producer of oil and gas in the world, yet we are in the midst of new
challenges due to a lack of appropriate infrastructure to bring those
resources to our consumers.
Also, the EPA has recently reported that methane emissions from oil
and gas wells are down 79 percent since 2005, and total methane
emissions from natural gas systems are down 11 percent since that same
year. However, the administration intends to propose another regulation
that only results in more bureaucratic red tape and higher energy
costs. This does nothing to address the underlying issue.
There is a better solution, which not only achieves lower greenhouse
gas emissions, but also improves the outcomes for the American
taxpayer.
My amendment would increase the amount of funds made available to
both the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service by $5
million each to help expedite the approval of additional pipeline
infrastructure that would more efficiently and more cleanly deliver our
taxpayer-owned resources to consumers. This will ensure that the BLM
and the Forest Service have the appropriate resources to permit rights-
of-way for gathering lines on Federal lands. This increase would be
offset by a very modest reduction of less than one-half of 1 percent to
the EPA environmental programs and management accounts.
It is important that we safely bring these natural resources to
market using the latest low-emissions, cutting-edge technology.
Permitting and constructing this critical infrastructure is beneficial
to the environment since natural gas could be transported, processed,
and sold to consumers instead of being vented or flared, which creates
the greenhouse gas problems.
Finally, constructing more pipelines furthers our country's ongoing
energy renaissance, while creating more jobs and growing our economy. A
recent API study shows over 1.1 million jobs on average per year and
over $1.1 trillion in capital investments will be generated by updating
our domestic midstream infrastructure.
So, in a nutshell, my amendment provides three great outcomes: first,
it reduces greenhouse gas emissions; second, it provides critical
infrastructure to safely transport taxpayer-owned resources to consumer
markets; and third, it promotes good-paying American jobs for these
hard-working American families.
I also want to take a second to compliment and thank my friend from
California (Mr. Calvert) and all of the subcommittee members and all of
the subcommittee staff for such a great job on this Interior
Appropriations bill.
I urge our Members to support my amendment and to support the
underlying bill.
Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. FLORES. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. CALVERT. I like the amendment. I would accept that amendment.
Mr. FLORES. I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's amendment would cut $12
million from the Environmental Protection Agency program and shift $5
million to the Bureau of Land Management and $5 million to the Forest
Service.
Now, I know cutting the EPA is an easy target for many of my
colleagues across here on the other side of the aisle, but I want to
assure my colleagues and understand if this amendment were to be
adopted, this account funds program is important to both sides of the
aisle. For example, it includes permitting for construction projects
across the country; toxic risk prevention, part of the successful
brownfields program; pesticide licensing; indoor air quality;
radiation.
Quite frankly, the EPA's work goes beyond the political talking point
of various regulations, and it is necessary to keep this valuable
Agency able to do the functions it needs to do to protect public
health.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FLORES. Mr. Chairman, I want to make sure that everybody knows
that this cuts one-half of 1 percent from the EPA to hopefully help
stop them from pursuing a regulatory scheme where the industry is
already working to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and then it takes
that money and puts it into accounts where we actually achieve
greenhouse gas reductions and we bring taxpayer-owned resources to
market in a clean, safe, and efficient way.

{time} 1400

My amendment accomplishes all of those things: reduces greenhouse gas
emissions, better jobs, and better infrastructure for hard-working
Americans.
Again, I ask all Members to support my amendment and to support the
underlying bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Flores).

[[Page H4732]]

The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Garamendi

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 2, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $14,000,000)''.
Page 18, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $11,611,000)''.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman from
California and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, in listening to the previous debate, I
would certainly agree we have made great strides in America in
accessing oil and gas, so much so that we have now become almost energy
independent, all for the good. All of that has happened in the last 7
to 8 years, and we are thankful for that.
However, this appropriation has more money than needed. The
administration has asked for about $32 million less.
I would like my colleagues to take a look at where we really do need
to spend some money. This amendment that I am proposing deals with
this. This is California's water situation today. The great Central
Valley of California is rapidly depleting its aquifers. The water
resources that agriculture and communities depend upon are rapidly
depleting.
This amendment would move about $11,611,000 to the USGS, to
Geological Survey, for the purposes of studying the aquifers of
California. Now, keep in mind that the State of California voters
approved a $7 billion bond act of which a good portion of that money is
for underground aquifer storage.
We have to have the science; we have to have the engineering to go
with it, and this amendment would provide the additional money that the
USGS needs in order to do the surveys and the engineering and
understanding the geology of those areas where we might be able to have
the aquifers replenished. That is what it is all about.
This leaves plenty of money behind for the purposes that the
committee has identified in the approval and the permitting of mineral
and gas and oil resources.
I see my colleague from California, who is well aware of these
issues, including aquifers in the San Fernando and the Santa Anna
aquifer area, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Marchant). The gentleman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I don't necessarily oppose where the
gentleman wants to go; I just oppose the offset right now because,
under the budget scenario that we are operating under, we obviously
have cut back a lot of these agencies somewhat.
I am sympathetic to the job that the United States Geological Survey
has. As you know, in California, we probably have the most adjudicated
water rights in the world. I will work on this in the future as this
process moves forward.
If it is necessary, after some conversations with USGS, that they
need additional resources, I will be happy to work with the gentleman
to attempt to do so, but this offset, we could not accept at this time.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman.
Certainly, the chairman understands the issues of water in
California, as well as anyone does, and also understands that, in order
for us to meet the current and certainly any future drought, we are
going to have to use the aquifers, which will require the services and
the knowledge and capability of the U.S. Geological Survey to fully
comprehend the potential that the various aquifers have throughout the
State, those in southern California, as well as the Central Valley and
coastal areas.
I would be delighted working with the chairman as the process moves
along and see if we might be able to find sufficient money and address
the specific needs of aquifer surveys by the USGS. I look forward to
working with the gentleman on that.
Rather than taking a ``no'' vote on this and going to a vote, I heard
the gentleman suggest that we can work together and quite possibly
solve this problem.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from California?
There was no objection.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Yoho

Mr. YOHO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 2, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $25,325,000)''.
Page 132, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $25,325,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Florida and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOHO. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Calvert and the
ranking members for the fine work they have done on H.R. 2822. I think,
overall, it is a great bill.
What my amendment does is move over $25 million from the Bureau of
Land Management's law enforcement activities and transfer that money
into the deficit savings account.
Just a brief cap, BLM, Bureau of Land Management, has a force of
roughly 200 uniformed officers and 70 criminal investigators on staff
enforcing a wide range of laws. In addition, the FBI has 35,000 agents;
the Department of Homeland Security has over 70,000 enforcement agents;
the IRS has over 3,700 criminal investigation employees, including
2,600 special agents; the ATF has over 2,500 special agents; and the
DEA has over 5,000.
With just those five agencies, there are over 115,000 national law
agents in just these five agencies. I feel that we have enough Federal
agencies to deal with the problem to enforce the laws on the books,
especially when we are talking about the violations on Federal lands.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's amendment would cut $25
million from the Bureau of Land Management program and put the savings
into the so-called spending reduction account.
The gentleman pointed out that he plans on reducing that amount on
law enforcement in the Bureau of Land Management. The employees who are
out doing this work are already overstretched and find themselves
sometimes in very dangerous positions.
The BLM is the caretaker of our Nation's public lands. They protect
one-eighth of the country. I think that we should make sure that BLM
law enforcement is able to do their job, do their job safely, come home
to their families, and protect America's resources.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. YOHO. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman knows, I am a westerner.
As was pointed out by Mr. Poe, a significant amount of the West is in
BLM control. In dealing with the BLM over the years, they have a lot of
land mass that they deal with, and they also work with the Native
American tribes and others dealing with really a restricted number of
law enforcement.
We have commented and criticized about how well they operate, but I
would hope that we didn't have to do this because there is a
considerable need for some law enforcement in those vast areas in which
the Federal Government owns throughout the Western United States.
Mr. YOHO. Mr. Chairman, I agree with that. This amendment is about
priorities.
I think with the state of the economy that we are on both sides, I
don't have to remind people that we have the debt ceiling coming up,
and we are short of money; we have the highway trust fund that is going
to come up again at the end of July, and we are short of money. I
believe that the Federal Government has enough agents and more than
enough debt for sure.

[[Page H4733]]

I just encourage people to vote in favor of this amendment.
We get people from our district, and they talk to us about what
happened out in Nevada with the Cliven Bundy case. When you have the
Bureau of Land Management with SWAT capabilities showing up like they
do, we get asked: Why are agencies like this having that kind of
tactical gear? Why do they have that kind of capacity?
This is not to weaken them in a sense, and we do have to patrol those
areas. I just think, at this point in time, that $25 million would
serve our debt.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, this bill already is $246 million below
the FY 2015-enacted level. This amendment only causes further damage.
Let's look at what has been happening over the past decade. As the
funding has decreased, we know from committee hearings that the demands
on the BLM have increased. There are more oil and gas leases to manage
to make sure that they are properly protected.
These issues that we deal with in the Bureau of Land Management, also
with law enforcement, is working directly with the public sometimes who
are out recreating and accessing these lands.
I would just like, once again, to reiterate my strong opposition to
cutting law enforcement for BLM.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. YOHO. Mr. Chairman, in lieu of what the chairman is saying, I
will withdraw the amendment at this time if we can have a serious
discussion about the debt before September.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Florida?
There was no objection.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Garamendi

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 2, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $4,010,000)''.
Page 8, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $3,902,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from California and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, this bill deals with the very real
problem for delivering water to southern California.
Those people who are familiar with the way in which the California
water system works, water flows down the Sacramento River--I will just
put this up here--water comes down the Sacramento River from the north
and up the San Joaquin from the south.
It all gets to the delta where the massive pumps at Tracy pick the
water up, put it in the canals, and send it to the San Joaquin Valley
and then on to southern California, Los Angeles, Orange County, and
other cities in that massive urban area.
There is a problem in the delta, a lot of problems. One of the
problems is aquatic plants. The delta is being totally overrun by water
hyacinths. Other parts of the United States and the West are also
finding these invasive water aquatic plants plugging their pumps,
reducing water supply, eliminating opportunities for boating,
recreation, fishing, and the like.
What this amendment does is address that problem by adding $3,902,000
to the aquatic habitat and species conservation fund, thereby allowing
the Federal agencies to work with the State and local agencies to
attack the aquatic plants.
Specifically in the delta, those who want to have more water flowing
south to the San Joaquin Valley and southern California's great
metropolitan areas, including Orange County, ought to be in favor of
unplugging the pumps and getting the water hyacinths reduced in the
delta.
That is what we would do. It is a very real problem; it is a problem
that exists today, and it is also money that comes from some 32 million
more dollars in this Bureau of Land Management oil and gas permitting
account than the President thought necessary. Surely, there is a little
bit of room to move around so that southern California can have the
water that it needs.
I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1415

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate what the gentleman is
attempting to do, again, on the offset.
Right now, the BLM is involved in this issue of the sage-grouse in
the West. We, in effect, gave both the BLM and the Fish and Wildlife
Service additional resources in order for us not to be in a position to
list the sage-grouse so as to make sure that we do what is necessary in
the sage ecosystem.
At the same time, we have plussed up conservation accounts within the
Fish and Wildlife Service for those types of invasive species. We have
a number of invasive species, not just in the plant world, but,
obviously, we have this invasive clam, as you mentioned, that is
stuffing up the quagga mussel, and that is causing disruptions
throughout the West.
I appreciate what the gentleman is trying to do. It is just that we
are under the budget allocations we have. We have done what we can in
both of these accounts, which is to do good work on conservation and to
make sure we conserve species and get rid of bad species throughout the
United States. I would hope the gentleman would withdraw his amendment,
and I will work with him in the future on the other issue.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, the chairman is quite correct. We do
have a problem. We do have quagga mussels. We have this particular one,
the water hyacinths, and there are other aquatic invasive species that
are causing havoc throughout the United States--certainly, the quagga
mussel in the East, along the Great Lakes, Chicago and the rest--and
certainly in California. The energy systems at Hoover Dam, on the
Colorado River, are impeded by quagga mussels, and there is the delta
with water hyacinths, and there are other lakes and streams throughout
the West.
If we let this problem continue to grow, we are going to continue to
have less water and less power available to us. This is just under $4
million coming out of an account that was plussed up by some $32
million over and above what the administration thought necessary. I
would remind all of us that the administration has done a rather good
job on permitting, so much so that we now have the greatest production
of oil and gas ever in the United States, so much so that we are on the
verge of becoming energy sufficient.
Do we need another $32 million to do what is already being done, or
would that $4 million of that $32 million be better spent in dealing
with the very real problem of trying to get water to the pumps so it
can go south to Orange County and to Los Angeles and to San Joaquin
County?
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with you, but I am going to
ask for a vote on this one.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, in closing, the plus up in the BLM account
was primarily to help resolve the issue in 11 States involving the
sage-grouse, which is close to a listing, and we have a plus up in the
Fish and Wildlife Service accounts to recognize a real problem that
hits 11 Western States.
We do not underestimate the problems in the West as they involve the
drought, and we are going to continue to work on that. Again, I would
oppose this based upon the offset.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
will be postponed.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

In addition, $39,696,000 is for Mining Law Administration
program operations, including the cost of administering the
mining

[[Page H4734]]

claim fee program, to remain available until expended, to be
reduced by amounts collected by the Bureau and credited to
this appropriation from mining claim maintenance fees and
location fees that are hereby authorized for fiscal year
2016, so as to result in a final appropriation estimated at
not more than $1,015,046,000, and $2,000,000, to remain
available until expended, from communication site rental fees
established by the Bureau for the cost of administering
communication site activities.

land acquisition

For expenses necessary to carry out sections 205, 206, and
318(d) of Public Law 94-579, including administrative
expenses and acquisition of lands or waters, or interests
therein, $7,250,000, to be derived from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund and to remain available until expended.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Guinta

Mr. GUINTA. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 3, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $7,000,000)''.
Page 8, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $11,000,000)''.
Page 9, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
Page 16, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $4,000,000)''.
Page 62, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.
Page 77, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
Page 105, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.

Mr. GUINTA (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent
to dispense with the reading.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from New Hampshire?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from New Hampshire and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Hampshire.
Mr. GUINTA. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations bill in order to increase funding by $16 million for the
Land and Water Conservation Fund.
Since 1977, LWCF receipts have been collected annually to
specifically fund Federal land acquisition, conserve threatened and
endangered species, and provide grants to States. However, more than
$18 billion has been syphoned from the LWCF trust fund since the
program's inception in 1965, diverted from their original conservation
purpose. Despite a history of underfunding, the LWCF remains a crucial
Federal program to conserve our Nation's land, water, historic, and
recreational heritage.
As those in my home State of New Hampshire know, we are lucky to call
one of the most pristine ecological environments in the Nation our
home, and we understand firsthand LWCF's impact on both our State's
natural resources and on our access to hunting, fishing, and outdoor
activities. The LWCF is also an essential tool to expand public lands
and to protect national parks, national wildlife refuges, national
forests, wild and scenic river corridors, national scenic and historic
trails, the Bureau of Land Management lands, and other Federal areas.
I applaud the Appropriations Committee for its hard work on this
important bill as it does prevent harmful executive overreach, reduces
regulatory burdens on job creators and local communities, and it finds
important savings for taxpayers. I certainly urge my colleagues to
support the underlying bill, but given the importance of the LWCF
programs across the country and in New Hampshire, I believe more robust
funding for this particular program is important for the reasons I have
stated.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, as the gentleman knows, the bill already
provides $87 million for other land acquisition. Our intent was to
needle a Federal land acquisition program that has strong support in
the East--certainly, in New Hampshire--and lukewarm support in the
West, where the government already owns a significant amount of real
estate in the Western United States. When the conference begins on this
bill with the Senate, Congress will exercise its power of the purse by
selecting projects from the President's budget to improve recreational
access that have strong local, State, and congressional support.
I will work with the gentleman. I know he is a strong advocate of the
Land and Water Conservation Fund, but this amendment might leave
advocates on both sides of the aisle with some difficult and
unnecessary choices. Therefore, I ask the gentleman to consider
withdrawing his amendment, knowing I will be working with him in the
future to see if we can't be of assistance through the conference
process.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GUINTA. Mr. Chair, I thank the chairman, and I look forward to
working with him on this particular issue as it is important and
critical to New Hampshire.
I recognize the differences between the East and the West and the
challenges that we do face. Certainly, I support, again, the underlying
bill, and I look forward to working with the chairman on this very
important issue in New Hampshire.
Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from New Hampshire?
There was no objection.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Garamendi

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 3. line 25, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from California and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, to everyone here, this is one of those
amendments that really becomes a talking point amendment, but this is
something we need to talk about. Our colleague, a moment ago, raised
the question of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. In addition to
the words that he spoke, we need to be aware that, later this next
month--in about 100 days, actually. I guess that is more than a month--
the Land and Water Conservation Fund is going to disappear. It needs to
be reauthorized, and I see on the floor here today the men and women
who are in a position to make that happen.
We really cannot lose this program. For example, there are projects
in the Sequoia National Forest, which is in the majority leader's
district, that were funded through the Land and Water Conservation
Fund. There is a Galloway Park playground expansion in Clark County,
Ohio. I think we know in whose district that is--the Speaker's
district. The chairman of the subcommittee here is from San Bernardino.
There is the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument,
and there is a Santa Ana River Trail and Parkway. I am sure the
chairman is familiar with that parkway. These are all Land and Water
Conservation projects that, over the years, have been in place. We have
100 days, and we have got some work to do here.
Is the money available? Yes. There is $18 billion in the Land and
Water Conservation Fund, should it continue to exist, that has not been
spent. It is sitting there. Well, I guess there is an IOU there.
Actually, the cash isn't there. There is an IOU because, over the
years, we have diverted money from the original purpose and law to
transfer that money over to all kinds of projects. Perhaps some of it
even went to debt reduction. Nonetheless, it has not been used for its
intended purpose and legal purpose, which is for the Land and Water
Conservation Fund. Every year, over $900 million of royalties comes in
from the oil and gas and energy companies for the public resources that
they mine or pump out of the earth. Only a small fraction of that money
has ever gone to the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
I want all of us to pay attention to this extraordinarily important
program--a program that I was able to work with when I was Deputy
Secretary at the Department of the Interior, overseeing the projects in
all of

[[Page H4735]]

our districts--parks, local parks, some of the big national parks,
including national forests, such as the one in Mr. McCarthy's district.
Why are we not moving aggressively to reauthorize the Land and Water
Conservation Fund? Why is it that, every year, we deny the public,
whether it is a playground or a swimming pool or a park expansion
playground in Ohio, the opportunity for better lives in their own
communities?
I do not understand, and I don't think that if any of us were to
think about this for any amount of time that we would not say, yes,
let's reauthorize the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Let's not let
it expire. Let's make sure that the money that was intended for it--the
royalties from the resources of this great Nation--be spent on
providing for the projects that all of America can enjoy. That is what
it is all about.
I don't know if I will go to a vote on this one, but I have, in my
view here, leaders in the House who really have the power and, I think,
the obligation to make sure the LWCF, the Land and Water Conservation
Fund, is reauthorized and that we adequately fund it. I achieved, at
least, my own goal of talking about something that I believe to be
important.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from California?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

oregon and california grant lands

For expenses necessary for management, protection, and
development of resources and for construction, operation, and
maintenance of access roads, reforestation, and other
improvements on the revested Oregon and California Railroad
grant lands, on other Federal lands in the Oregon and
California land-grant counties of Oregon, and on adjacent
rights-of-way; and acquisition of lands or interests therein,
including existing connecting roads on or adjacent to such
grant lands; $110,602,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That 25 percent of the aggregate of all
receipts during the current fiscal year from the revested
Oregon and California Railroad grant lands is hereby made a
charge against the Oregon and California land-grant fund and
shall be transferred to the General Fund in the Treasury in
accordance with the second paragraph of subsection (b) of
title II of the Act of August 28, 1937 (43 U.S.C. 1181f).

range improvements

For rehabilitation, protection, and acquisition of lands
and interests therein, and improvement of Federal rangelands
pursuant to section 401 of the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1751), notwithstanding any
other Act, sums equal to 50 percent of all moneys received
during the prior fiscal year under sections 3 and 15 of the
Taylor Grazing Act (43 U.S.C. 315b, 315m) and the amount
designated for range improvements from grazing fees and
mineral leasing receipts from Bankhead-Jones lands
transferred to the Department of the Interior pursuant to
law, but not less than $10,000,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That not to exceed $600,000 shall be
available for administrative expenses.

service charges, deposits, and forfeitures

For administrative expenses and other costs related to
processing application documents and other authorizations for
use and disposal of public lands and resources, for costs of
providing copies of official public land documents, for
monitoring construction, operation, and termination of
facilities in conjunction with use authorizations, and for
rehabilitation of damaged property, such amounts as may be
collected under Public Law 94-579 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.),
and under section 28 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C.
185), to remain available until expended: Provided, That,
notwithstanding any provision to the contrary of section
305(a) of Public Law 94-579 (43 U.S.C. 1735(a)), any moneys
that have been or will be received pursuant to that section,
whether as a result of forfeiture, compromise, or settlement,
if not appropriate for refund pursuant to section 305(c) of
that Act (43 U.S.C. 1735(c)), shall be available and may be
expended under the authority of this Act by the Secretary to
improve, protect, or rehabilitate any public lands
administered through the Bureau of Land Management which have
been damaged by the action of a resource developer,
purchaser, permittee, or any unauthorized person, without
regard to whether all moneys collected from each such action
are used on the exact lands damaged which led to the action:
Provided further, That any such moneys that are in excess of
amounts needed to repair damage to the exact land for which
funds were collected may be used to repair other damaged
public lands.

miscellaneous trust funds

In addition to amounts authorized to be expended under
existing laws, there is hereby appropriated such amounts as
may be contributed under section 307 of Public Law 94-579 (43
U.S.C. 1737), and such amounts as may be advanced for
administrative costs, surveys, appraisals, and costs of
making conveyances of omitted lands under section 211(b) of
that Act (43 U.S.C. 1721(b)), to remain available until
expended.

administrative provisions

The Bureau of Land Management may carry out the operations
funded under this Act by direct expenditure, contracts,
grants, cooperative agreements and reimbursable agreements
with public and private entities, including with States.
Appropriations for the Bureau shall be available for
purchase, erection, and dismantlement of temporary
structures, and alteration and maintenance of necessary
buildings and appurtenant facilities to which the United
States has title; up to $100,000 for payments, at the
discretion of the Secretary, for information or evidence
concerning violations of laws administered by the Bureau;
miscellaneous and emergency expenses of enforcement
activities authorized or approved by the Secretary and to be
accounted for solely on the Secretary's certificate, not to
exceed $10,000: Provided, That notwithstanding Public Law 90-
620 (44 U.S.C. 501), the Bureau may, under cooperative cost-
sharing and partnership arrangements authorized by law,
procure printing services from cooperators in connection with
jointly produced publications for which the cooperators share
the cost of printing either in cash or in services, and the
Bureau determines the cooperator is capable of meeting
accepted quality standards: Provided further, That projects
to be funded pursuant to a written commitment by a State
government to provide an identified amount of money in
support of the project may be carried out by the Bureau on a
reimbursable basis. Appropriations herein made shall not be
available for the destruction of healthy, unadopted, wild
horses and burros in the care of the Bureau or its
contractors or for the sale of wild horses and burros that
results in their destruction for processing into commercial
products.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service

resource management

For necessary expenses of the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service, as authorized by law, and for scientific
and economic studies, general administration, and for the
performance of other authorized functions related to such
resources, $1,220,343,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2017: Provided, That not to exceed $10,257,000
shall be used for implementing subsections (a), (b), (c), and
(e) of section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16
U.S.C. 1533) (except for processing petitions, developing and
issuing proposed and final regulations, and taking any other
steps to implement actions described in subsection (c)(2)(A),
(c)(2)(B)(i), or (c)(2)(B)(ii)).

{time} 1430

Amendment Offered by Mr. Clawson of Florida

Mr. CLAWSON of Florida. I have an amendment for consideration,
please.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 8, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
Page 62, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $1,200,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Florida and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. CLAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I will be brief and also try to
improve just a little bit on a very good bill.
My congratulations to the team and to the ranking member and to the
chairman.
Included in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife resource management account is
funding for the National Wildlife Refuge System. By my amendment, we
ask that an extra $1 million be added to this account. We are
offsetting the increase by taking $1 million from the $2.4 billion
Environmental Protection Agency programs and management account, hardly
a stretch.
The National Wildlife Refuge System has grown to over 563 national
wildlife refuge and 38 wetland management districts, 150 million acres
in all. We have several of these national wildlife refuges in my
district or near my district, including J.N. ``Ding'' Darling National
Wildlife Refuge on Sanibel Island and the Florida Panther National
Wildlife Refuge outside of Naples.
The ``Ding'' Darling National Wildlife Refuge, in particular, sets
itself apart as a leading contributor to the economy, with 816,000
visitors a year. Importantly, my hero, my mother, loves to go there,
and I love to take her there in the autumn of her lifetime. I ask my
fellow Members to support this

[[Page H4736]]

$1 million adjustment to these national treasures.
Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CLAWSON of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I think this is a good amendment. I
certainly support it and would ask Members to vote ``aye'' on the
amendment.
Mr. CLAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman and the
ranking member.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Clawson of Florida).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

construction

For construction, improvement, acquisition, or removal of
buildings and other facilities required in the conservation,
management, investigation, protection, and utilization of
fish and wildlife resources, and the acquisition of lands and
interests therein; $13,144,000, to remain available until
expended.

land acquisition

For expenses necessary to carry out the Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act of 1965, (16 U.S.C. 460l-4 et seq.),
including administrative expenses, and for acquisition of
land or waters, or interest therein, in accordance with
statutory authority applicable to the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service, $27,500,000, to be derived from the Land
and Water Conservation Fund and to remain available until
expended: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated for
specific land acquisition projects may be used to pay for any
administrative overhead, planning or other management costs.

cooperative endangered species conservation fund

For expenses necessary to carry out section 6 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1535), $50,095,000,
to be derived from the Land and Water Conservation Fund and
to remain available until expended.

national wildlife refuge fund

For expenses necessary to implement the Act of October 17,
1978 (16 U.S.C. 715s), $13,228,000.

north american wetlands conservation fund

For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of the
North American Wetlands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 4401 et
seq.), $35,000,000, to remain available until expended.

neotropical migratory bird conservation

For expenses necessary to carry out the Neotropical
Migratory Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 6101 et seq.),
$3,660,000, to remain available until expended.

multinational species conservation fund

For expenses necessary to carry out the African Elephant
Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 4201 et seq.), the Asian Elephant
Conservation Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 4261 et seq.), the
Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994 (16 U.S.C. 5301
et seq.), the Great Ape Conservation Act of 2000 (16 U.S.C.
6301 et seq.), and the Marine Turtle Conservation Act of 2004
(16 U.S.C. 6601 et seq.), $9,561,000, to remain available
until expended.

state and tribal wildlife grants

For wildlife conservation grants to States and to the
District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the United States
Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa,
and Indian tribes under the provisions of the Fish and
Wildlife Act of 1956 and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act, for the development and implementation of programs for
the benefit of wildlife and their habitat, including species
that are not hunted or fished, $59,195,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That of the amount
provided herein, $4,084,000 is for a competitive grant
program for Indian tribes not subject to the remaining
provisions of this appropriation: Provided further, That
$5,987,000 is for a competitive grant program to implement
approved plans for States, territories, and other
jurisdictions and at the discretion of affected States, the
regional Associations of fish and wildlife agencies, not
subject to the remaining provisions of this appropriation:
Provided further, That the Secretary shall, after deducting
$10,071,000 and administrative expenses, apportion the amount
provided herein in the following manner: (1) to the District
of Columbia and to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, each a
sum equal to not more than one-half of 1 percent thereof; and
(2) to Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin
Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, each a sum equal to not more than one-fourth of 1
percent thereof: Provided further, That the Secretary shall
apportion the remaining amount in the following manner: (1)
one-third of which is based on the ratio to which the land
area of such State bears to the total land area of all such
States; and (2) two-thirds of which is based on the ratio to
which the population of such State bears to the total
population of all such States: Provided further, That the
amounts apportioned under this paragraph shall be adjusted
equitably so that no State shall be apportioned a sum which
is less than 1 percent of the amount available for
apportionment under this paragraph for any fiscal year or
more than 5 percent of such amount: Provided further, That
the Federal share of planning grants shall not exceed 75
percent of the total costs of such projects and the Federal
share of implementation grants shall not exceed 65 percent of
the total costs of such projects: Provided further, That the
non-Federal share of such projects may not be derived from
Federal grant programs: Provided further, That any amount
apportioned in 2016 to any State, territory, or other
jurisdiction that remains unobligated as of September 30,
2017, shall be reapportioned, together with funds
appropriated in 2018, in the manner provided herein.

administrative provisions

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service may carry out
the operations of Service programs by direct expenditure,
contracts, grants, cooperative agreements and reimbursable
agreements with public and private entities. Appropriations
and funds available to the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service shall be available for repair of damage to public
roads within and adjacent to reservation areas caused by
operations of the Service; options for the purchase of land
at not to exceed $1 for each option; facilities incident to
such public recreational uses on conservation areas as are
consistent with their primary purpose; and the maintenance
and improvement of aquaria, buildings, and other facilities
under the jurisdiction of the Service and to which the United
States has title, and which are used pursuant to law in
connection with management, and investigation of fish and
wildlife resources: Provided, That notwithstanding 44 U.S.C.
501, the Service may, under cooperative cost sharing and
partnership arrangements authorized by law, procure printing
services from cooperators in connection with jointly produced
publications for which the cooperators share at least one-
half the cost of printing either in cash or services and the
Service determines the cooperator is capable of meeting
accepted quality standards: Provided further, That the
Service may accept donated aircraft as replacements for
existing aircraft: Provided further, That notwithstanding 31
U.S.C. 3302, all fees collected for non-toxic shot review and
approval shall be deposited under the heading ``United States
Fish and Wildlife Service--Resource Management'' and shall be
available to the Secretary, without further appropriation, to
be used for expenses of processing of such non-toxic shot
type or coating applications and revising regulations as
necessary, and shall remain available until expended.

National Park Service

operation of the national park system

For expenses necessary for the management, operation, and
maintenance of areas and facilities administered by the
National Park Service and for the general administration of
the National Park Service, $2,327,811,000, of which
$10,001,000 for planning and interagency coordination in
support of Everglades restoration and $96,961,000 for
maintenance, repair, or rehabilitation projects for
constructed assets shall remain available until September 30,
2017.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Clawson of Florida

Mr. CLAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 14, line 10, after the first dollar amount, insert
``increased by $1,000,000''.
Page 14, line 10, after the second dollar amount, insert
``increased by $1,000,000''.
Page 62, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert ``reduced
by $1,250,000''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Florida and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. CLAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, by this amendment, we are
asking for an additional $1 million to be put towards Everglades
restoration to be paid for with a decrease in the Environmental
Protection Agency's environmental programs and management account.
I first want to say that I am grateful to my Democratic colleague
from Florida, Patrick Murphy, who has supported me on this and
repeatedly supports our important Everglades initiatives.
Shortly after retiring from the private sector 3 years ago, I took a
walk in the Gulf with my father. When we waded into the Gulf, we got to
about knee depth of water, and we looked down and we couldn't see our
toes because that was a bad year for all the discharges into the Gulf
of Mexico.
So my dad said to me: Can you do something about this? Just get
involved.
I said: Dad, what can a retired auto parts executive do to help this
situation?
He said: If you get involved, you will figure out what to do.

[[Page H4737]]

From there, I got involved in local matters and then eventually came
here to Congress.
In Florida, we are indeed blessed to have an extensive network of
over 1.5 million acres of freshwater and saltwater, known as Everglades
National Park. It is the largest remaining subtropical wilderness in
the United States, and it serves as home to numerous beautiful species,
including a number of endangered species. For these reasons, we must
guarantee the Everglades continue to reflect our shared values of
healthy landscape through effective stewardship and conscientious
management, and that is why I offer this amendment today.
Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CLAWSON of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the gentleman's
amendment. I know he has been a champion for the Everglades. It is
certainly a concern of this committee. I want to get out there and look
at those pythons in the Everglades. I understand they are all over the
place.
Mr. CLAWSON of Florida. There are too many of them.
Mr. CALVERT. Yes, too many, that is the problem.
I would be happy to support this amendment. I would urge an ``aye''
vote when it comes up.
Mr. CLAWSON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Clawson).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Sewell of Alabama

Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 14, line 10, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,500,000)''.
Page 14, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $4,500,000)''.
Page 15, line 5, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $4,500,000)''.
Page 36, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $7,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentlewoman
from Alabama and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Alabama.
Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to thank the
gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert), the subcommittee chairman, as
well as the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), the ranking
member, for their hard work in shepherding this important legislation
to the floor and, most importantly, for working with me and my staff to
propose this amendment and to make sure that it is budget neutral.
On the 50th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, we need to invest
in the National Park Service sites associated with the civil rights
movement, not cut necessary funding. Seminal locations such as the
Selma to Montgomery National Historic Trail, Little Rock Central High
School National Historic Site, Brown v. Board of Education National
Historic Site, and the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site
tell the story of the struggle for civil rights and voting rights in
this country. It is our obligation to preserve these prominent
locations for future generations.
My amendment increases funding by $2.5 million for the documentation
and preservation of civil rights history as well as restores $2.5
million for the rehabilitation and preservation of historic sites on
the campuses of Historically Black Colleges, and $2 million additional
for competitive grants for the civil rights initiative to preserve
sites of the civil rights movement.
Institutions such as Miles College in Alabama and Tougaloo College in
Mississippi served as a base for students who were involved in the
civil rights movement. Some projects that would benefit would include
digitizing the archives at places like Tuskegee University, where the
Tuskegee Airmen as well as the records and papers of Booker T.
Washington and George Washington Carver reside. Other sites that would
benefit from this funding include the Carter G. Woodson Home National
Historic Site in Washington, D.C., the Selma Interpretive Center at
Selma University, the Selma to Montgomery Interpretive Center at
Alabama State University, and the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad
National Historic Park in Maryland.
Mr. Chairman, over the last 5 years, as the Representative of the
Seventh Congressional District and a proud product of Selma, Alabama,
my native hometown, it has been an honor to not only represent this
wonderful district, but to protect the legacy of those that came before
us and to make sure that the history of the movement is preserved for
future generations.
It was my high honor on March 7, 2015, to welcome President and Mrs.
Obama as well as President and Mrs. George W. Bush, along with 100
Members of Congress and the Senate, Republican and Democrat, to my
hometown of Selma, where we commemorated the 50th anniversary of the
Selma to Montgomery March. Let us try to preserve that history and
continue to show our commitment to the legacy of John Lewis and those
brave Freedom Fighters who changed the Nation as well as this world by
their quest for equality and justice for all.
I want to again thank the subcommittee chair, Mr. Calvert, and I want
to thank the ranking member, Ms. McCollum, for their dedication and
commitment to this preservation. I urge my colleagues to support the
Sewell amendment and commit ourselves to the task of preserving the
civil rights and voting rights.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. I claim time in opposition, but I am not opposed to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentlewoman for a fine
amendment and the great work that she has done working with both the
majority and minority staff in fashioning this amendment.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CALVERT. I yield to the gentlewoman from Minnesota.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for the generosity
of yielding to me.
I also support the Sewell amendment to increase funding for the
President's civil rights initiative. I remain a strong supporter of the
President's initial request for $50 million for the civil rights
initiative. While the gentlewoman's amendment would increase funding by
$7 million, we still have a long way to go to get the adequate funding
for these very important sacred places, I might add, in our Nation's
history, to protect them.
I appreciate the majority's willingness to accept this amendment, and
I thank the sponsor for offering it.
I thank the gentleman, once again, for his kindness in yielding.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I just want to again reiterate
my thanks. In this commemorative year of the Selma to Montgomery March
and so many pivotal moments, including our upcoming 50th anniversary of
the signing of the Voting Rights Act, I thank you for your commitment
to making sure that we preserve these wonderful sites for future
generations.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. EDWARDS. Mr. Chair, I wish to join my colleague from Alabama,
Congresswoman Sewell, to support this amendment, which would restore
necessary funding for preserving our nation's Civil Rights history.
This amendment would increase funding by $2.5 million for
documentation and preservation of Civil Rights history, as well as
restoring $2.5 million for the rehabilitation and preservation of
historic sites on the campuses of HBCUs. In my own state of Maryland,
the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Monument in Dorchester
is currently putting together educational programming in conjunction
with the Harriet Tubman State Park, which is slated to open later this
year.
This National Monument is an important part of telling our American
story--especially in light of the fact that, currently, only 26 of our
nation's 460 national parks have a primary focus on African-American
history.
It is our responsibility as federal representatives to come together
in order to preserve the history of our nation and its people. We must
keep this commitment to preserve the legacy of the Civil Rights
Movement, and the land and structures that will keep that legacy alive.

[[Page H4738]]

I encourage all of my colleagues, both Democrat and Republican, to
support this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Alabama (Ms. Sewell).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Gallego

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 14, line 10, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000) (reduced by $1,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Arizona and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, my amendment will help ensure that all
communities are able to participate in decisions that shape the
National Park Service. Environmental justice is defined as the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement of all people--regardless of race,
color, national origin, or income--with respect to our Nation's
environmental laws and policies. This amendment represents an important
step towards that goal.
The NPS has a robust planning, environment, and public comment
database and Web site, known as PEPC.

{time} 1445

This Web site is used for consultation and providing information on
planning issues such as management plans, construction projects,
environmental assessments, and environmental impact statements. This
Web site is how the users of the National Park Service can participate
in NPS decisionmaking.
Unfortunately, however, PEPC is only available in English--no
Spanish, none of the Asian languages spoken by the fastest growing
segment of our population, and none of the indigenous languages of our
Native American brothers and sisters.
To address this shortcoming, my amendment will provide $1 million to
update PEPC. This funding will provide translation of the contents of
PEPC to the public, the ability of the public to provide input into the
PEPC process in the most commonly spoken languages, and informing
affected communities of the improvements.
Mr. Chairman, America is becoming more and more diverse every day,
and our land management agencies must adapt to it. It is critical that
new and growing community can access our public lands and services.
They are the new users and stewards that Federal land management
agencies such as the National Park Service must engage as it prepares
for its centennial.
To reach these Americans, the NPS will need improved tools to clearly
communicate with people who may struggle to comprehend materials in
English. That is exactly what my amendment intends to accomplish. This
measure will help the Park Service and the Department of the Interior
to achieve their performance benchmarks.
One of the key measures of the Department's environmental justice
outcomes is outreach to minority and underserved communities. Executive
Order 13116 states that all Federal agencies shall provide access to
services for persons with limited English proficiency. By offering a
Web interface in multiple languages, NPS will increase its relevance to
minority communities and help the Department of the Interior to make
progress towards this very important requirement.
Mr. Chairman, we can all agree that engaging the public on important
decisions that affect their communities is a linchpin of our system of
government. When all communities are afforded access to the
decisionmaking process, we improve the outcomes of those decisions and
we strengthen our democracy.
I hope all Members will join me in supporting this critical
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gallego).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Beyer

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 14, after line 14, insert the following:

emergency infrastructure repairs

For expenses necessary for emergency infrastructure repairs
related to the National Park Service deferred maintenance
backlog, $11,500,000,000, to remain available until expended.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman from Virginia and a
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to provide
$11.5 billion to fund emergency infrastructure repairs related to the
National Park Service deferred maintenance backlog.
Mr. Chair, earlier this month, the National Park Service, at the
recommendation of the Department of Transportation, took the
precautionary measure of closing two lanes on the iconic Arlington
Memorial Bridge, one of the most important entrances to the Nation's
Capital and a major artery for many of my constituents commuting to
work every day.
The crisis of the Memorial Bridge, whose replacement will cost a
startling $250 million, demonstrates the degradation of park
infrastructure throughout the country. It also shows the extent of the
backlog and the need to provide funds to ensure reliability for the
economy as well as the safety of the public.
The backlog has also grown because of a steady decline in the
construction account. Over the last decade, there has been a 62 percent
decline, $227 million in today's dollars. The Park Service receives
only 58 cents out of every dollar needed just to keep the backlog from
growing.
Mr. Chair, the United States is the richest country in the history of
mankind. We are the democratic leader, the military leader, the human
rights leader, the financial leader of all the world. Can we not also
be the investment leader?
This country needs to be the country that invests in our
infrastructure today for our children and our grandchildren tomorrow.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of increased funding for
the National Park Service in order to address the deferred maintenance
backlog.
Despite its significant and multifaceted contributions to our
country, the National Park Service budget has been shrinking,
compromising its ability to adequately protect our treasured national
history. Shrinking appropriations and increasing wear and tear on aging
infrastructure has led to a maintenance backlog of approximately $11.5
billion dollars, including dilapidated visitor centers, unmaintained
trails, and failing water treatment facilities.
More than half of the maintenance backlog, approximately $6 billion,
is comprised of transportation projects that require funding through
the Highway Trust Fund, not the Park Service. The Arlington Memorial
Bridge, which is so important to our nation, connecting the Lincoln
Memorial to Arlington National Cemetery, is so badly corroded that it
must be partially shut down for six to nine months. In fact, the
estimated total cost of repairs for the bridge is more than the entire
annual allocation to the Park Service from the Highway Trust Fund.
This trend is completely unsustainable if we want our children and
grandchildren to have the same opportunity to visit and enjoy some of
our nation's most iconic sites.
At recent hearings on the Natural Resources Committee, I have heard
many of my colleagues express their frustrations with the maintenance
backlog. This is our opportunity to address the problem, but we are
once again kicking the can down the pothole riddled, crumbling road.
Next year is the 100th anniversary of the National Park Service,
which will bring even more visitors to our parks. I urge my colleagues
to not only address the maintenance backlog at the National Park
Service, but to come together and pass a long-term fix for the Highway
Trust Fund so that we can address the maintenance backlog.

Point of Order

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order that the amendment
proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill.

[[Page H4739]]

The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)(3) of House
Resolution 5, 114th Congress, which states:
``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general
appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the
bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments
proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority
pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''
The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill
in violation of such section.
I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point
of order?
Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of increased funding for
the National Park Service in order to address the deferred maintenance
backlog.
Despite its significant and multifaceted contributions to our
country, the National Park Service budget has been shrinking,
compromising its ability to adequately protect our treasured national
history.
Shrinking appropriations and increasing wear and tear on aging
infrastructure has led----
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman must confine her remarks to the
point of order.
Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, the Interior Subcommittee has done its best
to invest in parks, but given its insufficient allocation, this was the
only meaningful way for the very obvious need for the $11.5 billion for
infrastructure.
The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point
of order?
If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
The gentleman from California makes a point of order that the
amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia violates section
3(d)(3) of House Resolution 5.
Section 3(d)(3) establishes a point of order against an amendment
proposing a net increase in budget authority in the pending bill.
As persuasively asserted by the gentleman from California, the
amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill.
Therefore, the point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in
order.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

national recreation and preservation

For expenses necessary to carry out recreation programs,
natural programs, cultural programs, heritage partnership
programs, environmental compliance and review, international
park affairs, and grant administration, not otherwise
provided for, $62,467,000.

historic preservation fund

For expenses necessary in carrying out the National
Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.),
$60,910,000, to be derived from the Historic Preservation
Fund and to remain available until September 30, 2017, of
which $500,000 is for competitive grants for the survey and
nomination of properties to the National Register of Historic
Places and as National Historic Landmarks associated with
communities currently underrepresented, as determined by the
Secretary, and of which $4,500,000 is for competitive grants
to preserve the sites and stories of the Civil Rights
movement: Provided, That such competitive grants shall be
made without imposing the matching requirements in Section
102(a)(3) of the National Historic Preservation Act (16
U.S.C. 470(a)(3)).

construction

For construction, improvements, repair, or replacement of
physical facilities, including modifications authorized by
section 104 of the Everglades National Park Protection and
Expansion Act of 1989 (16 U.S.C. 410r-8), $139,555,000, to
remain available until expended: Provided, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, for any project
initially funded in fiscal year 2016 with a future phase
indicated in the National Park Service 5-Year Line Item
Construction Plan, a single procurement may be issued which
includes the full scope of the project: Provided further,
That the solicitation and contract shall contain the clause
availability of funds found at 48 CFR 52.232-18.

land and water conservation fund

(rescission)

The contract authority provided for fiscal year 2016 by
section 9 of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965
(16 U.S.C. 460l-10a) is rescinded.

land acquisition and state assistance

For expenses necessary to carry out the Land and Water
Conservation Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l-4 through 11),
including administrative expenses, and for acquisition of
lands or waters, or interest therein, in accordance with the
statutory authority applicable to the National Park Service,
$84,367,000, to be derived from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund and to remain available until expended, of
which $48,117,000 is for the State assistance program and of
which $9,000,000 shall be for the American Battlefield
Protection Program grants as authorized by section 7301 of
the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law
111-11).

centennial challenge

For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of
section 814(g) of Public Law 104-333 (16 U.S.C. 1f) relating
to challenge cost share agreements, $20,000,000, to remain
available until expended, for Centennial Challenge projects
and programs: Provided, That not less than 50 percent of the
total cost of each project or program shall be derived from
non-Federal sources in the form of donated cash, assets, or a
pledge of donation guaranteed by an irrevocable letter of
credit.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Tsongas

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 16, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $30,000,000) (reduced by $30,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentlewoman
from Massachusetts and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Massachusetts.
Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
My amendment is intended to recognize the National Park Service's
Centennial Challenge and the importance of funding the program at the
level requested by President Obama and the National Park Service.
Next year is the 100th anniversary of the National Park Service, a
milestone in this country's history that we as a nation should be proud
of and celebrate. For a century now, the national parks have preserved
and protected our Nation's natural, cultural, and historic resources
for the use and enjoyment of future generations. I am proud to
represent two national parks.
In my hometown, the Lowell National Historic Park was the first urban
national park of its kind, commemorating, preserving, and protecting
the catalytic role the city played in spawning America's Industrial
Revolution.
Minute Man National Historic Park is just down the road in Concord,
where visitors can see firsthand where the shot heard 'round the world
was fired and where the American Revolution began.
The many visitors to both sites are grateful that our country has
made the commitment to protecting our history and our landscapes for
future generations, coming away awed and inspired by the sites that
have shaped who we are as a people.
The upcoming centennial is a tremendous opportunity to increase
public engagement with our parks so that we may not only celebrate the
places we love to visit with family and friends, but also make the
necessary investments that will prepare our parks for the next 100
years.
Despite its significant and multifaceted obligations, the Park
Service budget has been shrinking, compromising its ability to ensure
adequate protection to our treasured national history.
Since 2010, there has been more than a 7 percent, or $178 million in
today's dollars, reduction in the account to operate national parks.
Over the last decade, there has been a 62 percent, or $227 million in
today's dollars, decline in the National Park Service construction
account. This has led to an enormous deferred maintenance backlog,
totaling $11.5 billion of dilapidated visitor centers, unmaintained
trail centers, and failing water treatment facilities.
Historically, our parks have had bipartisan support. To mark the 50th
anniversary of the National Park Service in 1966, President Eisenhower
initiated Mission 66, which invested more than $1 billion in
improvements to visitor facilities throughout the park system.
Ten years ahead of the 100th anniversary, President George W. Bush
launched the Centennial Initiative, a 10-year, $3 billion plan to
restore the parks through a combination of public and private funding.
That effort was never fully realized, but President Obama revived the
initiative ahead of the 2016 centennial celebration.

[[Page H4740]]

In the FY15 omnibus spending bill, Congress provided $10 million to
reinvigorate the Centennial Challenge. The initial $10 million Federal
investment was matched by an additional $16 million in private
donations for signature centennial projects.
In total, 106 projects were selected throughout the country to
improve visitor services, chip away at the deferred maintenance
backlog, and support youth programs. Over 200 projects were submitted,
demonstrating the high demand for additional money to be matched by
private contributions.
Given the overwhelming success from the $10 million investment this
year, Congress should strongly consider increasing funding levels for
the Centennial Challenge in 2017.
I understand that this is a difficult task, given the inadequate
funding allocation provided for the Interior Department under the
Budget Control Act and sequestration. I regret that we were unable to
do so through this amendment. The funding allocation for the National
Park Service represents yet another example of why Congress must work
together on a bipartisan basis to end sequestration.
I hope that we can find a way to support the Centennial Challenge and
the President's budget request for the National Park Service so that we
not only celebrate the places we love to visit with family and friends,
but to make the necessary investments that will prepare our parks for
the next 100 years.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Beyer.)
Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of Representative Tsongas'
amendment to support the National Park Service's Centennial Challenge.
As a former National Park Service Ranger, I am proud to serve as a
Congressional Friend of the National Park Service Centennial, and I
eagerly await the centennial in 2016: Find Your Park.
As the NPS approaches its centennial year, it is important to ensure
they have the resources they need to enter into the second century of
service to the American people. The Interior Subcommittee has tried its
very best to invest in parks, given its insufficient allocation; but
with the centennial approaching and the buildup of park needs, this
level is not remotely enough for parks.
Recognizing the serious impact of both the Budget Control Act and
emergency wildfire suppression on the Interior allocation, Congress
still must find a way to meet the needs of parks by securing another
budget deal to get rid of the threat of sequester. There is no better
time than the centennial for a robust investment in our national parks
by Congress and the American people. It is time to make our national
parks a national priority.

{time} 1500

Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Poe of Texas). The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Tsongas).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

administrative provisions

(including transfer of funds)

In addition to other uses set forth in section 407(d) of
Public Law 105-391, franchise fees credited to a sub-account
shall be available for expenditure by the Secretary, without
further appropriation, for use at any unit within the
National Park System to extinguish or reduce liability for
Possessory Interest or leasehold surrender interest. Such
funds may only be used for this purpose to the extent that
the benefitting unit anticipated franchise fee receipts over
the term of the contract at that unit exceed the amount of
funds used to extinguish or reduce liability. Franchise fees
at the benefitting unit shall be credited to the sub-account
of the originating unit over a period not to exceed the term
of a single contract at the benefitting unit, in the amount
of funds so expended to extinguish or reduce liability.
For the costs of administration of the Land and Water
Conservation Fund grants authorized by section 105(a)(2)(B)
of the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (Public Law
109-432), the National Park Service may retain up to 3
percent of the amounts which are authorized to be disbursed
under such section, such retained amounts to remain available
until expended.
National Park Service funds may be transferred to the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Department of
Transportation, for purposes authorized under 23 U.S.C. 204.
Transfers may include a reasonable amount for FHWA
administrative support costs.

United States Geological Survey

surveys, investigations, and research

For expenses necessary for the United States Geological
Survey to perform surveys, investigations, and research
covering topography, geology, hydrology, biology, and the
mineral and water resources of the United States, its
territories and possessions, and other areas as authorized by
43 U.S.C. 31, 1332, and 1340; classify lands as to their
mineral and water resources; give engineering supervision to
power permittees and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
licensees; administer the minerals exploration program (30
U.S.C. 641); conduct inquiries into the economic conditions
affecting mining and materials processing industries (30
U.S.C. 3, 21a, and 1603; 50 U.S.C. 98g(1)) and related
purposes as authorized by law; and to publish and disseminate
data relative to the foregoing activities; $1,045,000,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2017; of which
$57,637,189 shall remain available until expended for
satellite operations; and of which $7,280,000 shall be
available until expended for deferred maintenance and capital
improvement projects that exceed $100,000 in cost: Provided,
That none of the funds provided for the ecosystem research
activity shall be used to conduct new surveys on private
property, unless specifically authorized in writing by the
property owner: Provided further, That no part of this
appropriation shall be used to pay more than one-half the
cost of topographic mapping or water resources data
collection and investigations carried on in cooperation with
States and municipalities.

administrative provisions

From within the amount appropriated for activities of the
United States Geological Survey such sums as are necessary
shall be available for contracting for the furnishing of
topographic maps and for the making of geophysical or other
specialized surveys when it is administratively determined
that such procedures are in the public interest; construction
and maintenance of necessary buildings and appurtenant
facilities; acquisition of lands for gauging stations and
observation wells; expenses of the United States National
Committee for Geological Sciences; and payment of
compensation and expenses of persons employed by the Survey
duly appointed to represent the United States in the
negotiation and administration of interstate compacts:
Provided, That activities funded by appropriations herein
made may be accomplished through the use of contracts,
grants, or cooperative agreements as defined in section 6302
of title 31, United States Code: Provided further, That the
United States Geological Survey may enter into contracts or
cooperative agreements directly with individuals or
indirectly with institutions or nonprofit organizations,
without regard to 41 U.S.C. 6101, for the temporary or
intermittent services of students or recent graduates, who
shall be considered employees for the purpose of chapters 57
and 81 of title 5, United States Code, relating to
compensation for travel and work injuries, and chapter 171 of
title 28, United States Code, relating to tort claims, but
shall not be considered to be Federal employees for any other
purposes.

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

ocean energy management

For expenses necessary for granting leases, easements,
rights-of-way and agreements for use for oil and gas, other
minerals, energy, and marine-related purposes on the Outer
Continental Shelf and approving operations related thereto,
as authorized by law; for environmental studies, as
authorized by law; for implementing other laws and to the
extent provided by Presidential or Secretarial delegation;
and for matching grants or cooperative agreements,
$167,270,000, of which $70,648,000, is to remain available
until September 30, 2017 and of which $96,622,000 is to
remain available until expended: Provided, That this total
appropriation shall be reduced by amounts collected by the
Secretary and credited to this appropriation from additions
to receipts resulting from increases to lease rental rates in
effect on August 5, 1993, and from cost recovery fees from
activities conducted by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
pursuant to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, including
studies, assessments, analysis, and miscellaneous
administrative activities: Provided further, That the sum
herein appropriated shall be reduced as such collections are
received during the fiscal year, so as to result in a final
fiscal year 2016 appropriation estimated at not more than
$70,648,000: Provided further, That not to exceed $3,000
shall be available for reasonable expenses related to
promoting volunteer beach and marine cleanup activities.

Amendment Offered by Mrs. Capps

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 21, line 3, after each of the first and second dollar
amounts, insert ``(reduced by $5,434,000)''.
Page 64, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $5,434,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentlewoman
from California and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

[[Page H4741]]

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, drilling for and transporting oil and gas
is a dirty and dangerous business. There is no disputing that.
No matter what assurances are given by the oil industry, spills do
happen, and they will continue to happen as we depend on fossil fuels
for our energy needs.
Sadly, my constituents in Santa Barbara, California, are far too
familiar with this reality. Just over a month ago, on May 19, over
100,000 gallons of crude oil spilled from the Plains All American
pipeline along the Gaviota Coast. The oil spilled down a hill, through
a culvert, and into the ocean, eventually spreading thick, black tar
along nearly 100 miles of coastline.
This was a unique spill, in that it impacted both land and ocean,
requiring both the Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, as well as
the Coast Guard to respond to and lead the cleanup effort.
When it comes to oil spills, the damage gets worse by the minute, so
ensuring that spill response teams are properly trained and prepared to
respond quickly is essential to minimizing the impacts. This is
precisely why the EPA has jurisdiction over the inland oil spill
program.
The EPA uses this funding to prevent, to prepare for, and to respond
to oil spills associated with the more than 600,000 oil storage
facilities that the Agency regulates. The EPA's oil program also
provides oil spill response resources and training for States,
localities, and tribal governments.
Despite its scope and importance, this program has been seriously
underfunded for years, and H.R. 2822 only makes things worse by funding
this program at nearly 25 percent less than the President requested.
My amendment would simply increase funding for this program by $5.4
million, to match the President's requested amount of $23.4 million for
fiscal year 2016. This modest increase in funding would help ensure
that EPA can do its job to help protect coastal areas, like the one I
represent, from the impacts of oil spills.
The funding increase, however, would be offset by reducing the
conventional energy account at the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management,
or BOME, by an equal amount.
I want to be clear. This funding reduction for BOME is intended to
target the funding used for new offshore oil and gas leasing. BOME will
continue to fund safety operations and environmental assessments.
The new 5-year offshore oil and gas program being drafted by BOME
calls for 14 potential lease sales, including in some new areas off the
East Coast. Expanding drilling by cutting funding for oil spill cleanup
is incredibly irresponsible.
Mr. Chairman, I have spent my entire career in Congress fighting to
stop offshore drilling because I firmly believe the risks outweigh the
benefits. Perhaps the current majority does not agree with me on this
goal.
I hope we can at least all agree that we should not be expanding oil
drilling unless we are properly preparing for the spills that will
inevitably occur. As long as we drill for oil, there will be oil
spills, and the economic and ecological risks of these spills only
increases when the oil is extracted offshore.
While the Coast Guard is responsible for responding to offshore
spills, the recent spill in my district shows that offshore drilling
can also have onshore impacts, especially for coastal communities like
those I represent.
The oil that spilled from the Plains All American pipeline was
extracted just a few miles offshore in Federal waters. It was then
pumped onshore to a holding facility, and it continued through the
pipeline that ruptured. This offshore oil spilled from the pipeline,
down a hillside, on to the beach, and back into the ocean under which
it had been extracted.
Drilling and spill cleanup are inextricably linked. The least we can
do is ensure that the EPA has the resources it needs to ensure that the
spills are quickly and properly cleaned up when they inevitably happen.
This is precisely what my amendment seeks to achieve. I urge my
colleagues to support it, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CALVERT. As in the case with many of the amendments today before
us, I cannot support the offset. Let me say this: EPA may be reimbursed
for oil spill response activities from the Oil Spill Liability Trust
Fund.
Now, personally, I think EPA should have direct access to that trust
fund to avoid the delays, these administrative reimbursement delays,
when responding to an oil spill such as what happened in California.
However, that is an authorizing issue, not an appropriating issue.
That is the proper place because those dollars will be there
eventually to clean that up, and we just need to clean up the
bureaucracy to have more immediacy in that process.
This offset, I cannot support; and so, for that reason, I oppose the
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I have no additional speakers. I am
prepared to close. In closing, I would like to reiterate two points.
First, that oil and gas exploration is inherently dangerous, there is
no disputing that. Spills do happen. Unfortunately, my district
observed these consequences firsthand during the Plains pipeline spill
just over a month ago.
Second, if we are going to continue to extract, to transport, and to
utilize oil, we need to be prepared for the inevitability of these
spills. The EPA's inland oil spill program is intended for just this
purpose, to be prepared to respond to the inevitable.
It is irresponsible to develop new oil extraction, including
offshore, without being prepared to respond to its risk.
Mr. Chairman, I urge support for this amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I would urge a ``no'' vote on this
amendment. I don't agree to the offset. The fact that we have an Oil
Spill Liability Trust Fund, that should be accessed.
I will be happy to work with the gentlewoman to work with the
authorizers where we can get more immediate response to these kinds of
activities that happen from time to time around the country, but I urge
a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California
will be postponed.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement

offshore safety and environmental enforcement

For expenses necessary for the regulation of operations
related to leases, easements, rights-of-way and agreements
for use for oil and gas, other minerals, energy, and marine-
related purposes on the Outer Continental Shelf, as
authorized by law; for enforcing and implementing laws and
regulations as authorized by law and to the extent provided
by Presidential or Secretarial delegation; and for matching
grants or cooperative agreements, $123,354,000, of which
$66,147,000 is to remain available until September 30, 2017,
and of which $57,207,000 is to remain available until
expended: Provided, That this total appropriation shall be
reduced by amounts collected by the Secretary and credited to
this appropriation from additions to receipts resulting from
increases to lease rental rates in effect on August 5, 1993,
and from cost recovery fees from activities conducted by the
Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement pursuant to
the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, including studies,
assessments, analysis, and miscellaneous administrative
activities: Provided further, That the sum herein
appropriated shall be reduced as such collections are
received during the fiscal year, so as to result in a final
fiscal year 2016 appropriation estimated at not more than
$66,147,000.
For an additional amount, $65,000,000, to remain available
until expended, to be reduced by amounts collected by the
Secretary and credited to this appropriation, which

[[Page H4742]]

shall be derived from non-refundable inspection fees
collected in fiscal year 2016, as provided in this Act:
Provided, That to the extent that amounts realized from such
inspection fees exceed $65,000,000, the amounts realized in
excess of $65,000,000 shall be credited to this appropriation
and remain available until expended: Provided further, That
for fiscal year 2016, not less than 50 percent of the
inspection fees expended by the Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement will be used to fund personnel and
mission-related costs to expand capacity and expedite the
orderly development, subject to environmental safeguards, of
the Outer Continental Shelf pursuant to the Outer Continental
Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.), including the
review of applications for permits to drill.

oil spill research

For necessary expenses to carry out title I, section 1016,
title IV, sections 4202 and 4303, title VII, and title VIII,
section 8201 of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, $14,899,000,
which shall be derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust
Fund, to remain available until expended.

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

regulation and technology

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, Public
Law 95-87, $123,253,000, to remain available until September
30, 2017: Provided, That appropriations for the Office of
Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement may provide for
the travel and per diem expenses of State and tribal
personnel attending Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement sponsored training.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Johnson of Ohio

Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 24, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $2,000,000)''.
Page 65, lines 5 and 10, after each dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Ohio and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I, too, would like to thank
Chairman Calvert and the subcommittee for a great underlying piece of
legislation. We have got a great appropriations bill here, and I look
forward to supporting it.
My amendment to the FY 2016 Interior and Environment Appropriations
bill will keep the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement's spending in check with the agency's obligation.
Specifically, it will reduce OSM's regulation and technology budget by
$2 million and transfer those funds to the Drinking Water State
Revolving Funds.
According to OSM, States and tribes perform 97 percent of the
regulatory activity relating to surface coal mining in the United
States; yet OSM receives 25 percent of the staffing resources to
perform 3 percent of the work.
This amendment will help bring spending in parity with the work done
by OSM.
Although the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, or SMCRA,
was enacted to allow States with approved programs to assume exclusive
jurisdiction of mining in their States, under the current
administration, OSM has increasingly used its inflated budget to
improperly usurp the lawful decisions of State regulators.
This amendment will help curtail excessive Federal interference and
restore the State's role in surface mining regulation. For instance,
over the past 5 years, OSM has spent more than $10 million of its
disproportionately large budget to pursue a wholesale regulatory
rewrite of the agency's regulatory program.
Dubbed the ``stream protection rule'' by the agency, this massive
regulatory undertaking has little to do with protecting streams and
more to do with riding roughshod over State regulating programs and the
role of other agencies, including State Clean Water Act regulators.
During its pursuit of the stream protection rule, OSM has completely
cut States out of the process, in violation of its legal obligations
under the National Environmental Policy Act.
My amendment will help restrain the resources of the agency from
promulgating a rule made without State consultation and in violation of
NEPA.
In fact, 10 States initially signed a memorandum of understanding
with OSM and agreed to serve as cooperating agencies for the
development of the environmental impact statement to accompany the so-
called stream protection rule.
Of those 10 States, six have withdrawn their respective MOUs due to
lack of consultation from OSM. These States include Alabama, New
Mexico, Utah, Texas, Kentucky, and West Virginia. More States are
expected to withdraw. While Wyoming is still a cooperating agency, they
have requested that their State seal be removed from the EIS.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my fellow colleagues to support this amendment
that will keep spending in check with the OSM's statutory
responsibilities.
Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. I
understand there is a level of frustration regarding the Office of
Surface Mining's continued use of funds to develop the stream buffer
rule, and we attempted to address that through the bill language to
limit funding.
I certainly support what you are doing for water infrastructure. It
is a good amendment that will leverage jobs, and I urge an ``aye''
vote.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to
my colleague from West Virginia (Mr. Mooney).
Mr. MOONEY of West Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of
Congressman Johnson's amendment to cut $2 million from the Office of
Surface Mining regulatory and technology budget and transfer those
funds to the Drinking Water State Revolving Funds.
This amendment will cut funding for an office that has launched an
all-out war on coal in my home State of West Virginia. The Office of
Surface Mining's stream protection rule is intentionally designed to
shut down all surface mining and a significant section of underground
mining in the Appalachian region.

{time} 1515

A 2012 study found the rewrite of the stream protection rule is
estimated to cost nearly 80,000 direct coal-related jobs. The coal
industry is vital to West Virginia and my district. Coal supports over
90 percent of the power generation in my State. It is crucial that we
cut the funding for the Office of Surface Mining before they can do any
more damage.
I thank my colleague for offering this amendment and urge its
passage.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I thank subcommittee Chairman
Calvert again for supporting this amendment.
I urge a ``yes'' vote by my colleagues.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Johnson).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

In addition, for costs to review, administer, and enforce
permits issued by the Bureau pursuant to section 507 of
Public Law 950987 (30 U.S.C. 1257), $40,000, to
remain available until expended: Provided, That fees assessed
and collected by the Office pursuant to such section 507
shall be credited to this account as discretionary offsetting
collections, to remain available until expended: Provided
further, That the sum herein appropriated from the general
fund shall be reduced as collections are received during the
fiscal year, so as to result in a fiscal year 2016
appropriation estimated at not more than $123,253,000.

abandoned mine reclamation fund

For necessary expenses to carry out title IV of the Surface
Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, Public Law
950987, $27,303,000, to be derived from receipts of
the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund and to remain available
until expended: Provided, That pursuant to Public Law
9709365, the Department of the Interior is
authorized to use up to 20 percent from the recovery of the
delinquent debt owed to the United States Government to pay
for contracts to collect these debts: Provided further, That
funds made available under title IV of Public Law
950987 may be used for any required non-Federal
share of the cost of projects funded by the Federal
Government for the purpose of environmental restoration
related to treatment or abatement of acid mine drainage from
abandoned mines: Provided further, That such projects must be
consistent with the purposes and priorities of the Surface
Mining Control and Reclamation Act: Provided further, That
amounts provided under

[[Page H4743]]

this heading may be used for the travel and per diem expenses
of State and tribal personnel attending Office of Surface
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement sponsored training.
In addition, $30,000,000, to remain available until
expended, for grants to States for reclamation of abandoned
mine lands and other related activities in accordance with
the terms and conditions in the report accompanying this Act:
Provided, That such additional amount shall be used for
economic and community development in conjunction with the
priorities in section 403(a) of the Surface Mining Control
and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1233(a)): Provided
further, That such additional amount shall be distributed in
equal amounts to the 3 Appalachian States with the greatest
amount of unfunded needs to meet the priorities described in
paragraphs (1) and (2) of such section: Provided further,
That such additional amount shall be allocated to States
within 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Yoho

Mr. YOHO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 25, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $29,904,000)''.
Page 132, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $29,904,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Florida and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOHO. Mr. Chairman, after speaking with Chairman Calvert and
Chairman Rogers with help on future amendments, I ask unanimous consent
to withdraw this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Florida?
There was no objection.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Griffith

Mr. GRIFFITH. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 26, line 7, strike ``3'' and insert ``6''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Virginia and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. GRIFFITH. Mr. Chairman, expanding the number of Appalachian
States eligible for this program from three to six will allow
additional States, including Virginia, to be able to participate. The
committee and the subcommittee came up with a great idea. I just want
to make sure it is expanded so that more States can benefit.
The Kentucky Coal Association was in this week for a press
conference, and one of their members said to me at that time that the
sickness that has been in Kentucky is now spreading to Virginia, and
they are absolutely right.
In 1 year's time, my district has lost hundreds of coal mine jobs due
to this administration's burdensome regulations on the coal industry;
but it is not just the coal mine jobs. Many more jobs in related
industries have also been lost.
With those jobs, jobs in things as diverse as the hardware store, the
Long John Silver's--you name it--are being lost throughout the coal
country of Appalachian Virginia.
The downturn of the coal industry in my district has led to many
economic difficulties for many of my constituents and the local
governments. I believe it is critical that we work to find ways to
provide assistance throughout all of the Appalachian coal country, and
my amendment would go part of the way to helping restore some economic
vitality to my district.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, the committee, as the gentleman knows, has
included this as a pilot program to test in a few States how community
and economic redevelopment can combine in conjunction with reclamation
of abandoned mine lands.
These funds will be provided to States with the largest unfunded
needs to date. If you expand that to include six States, this pilot
then starts to look more like a program, and that is not the
committee's intent. The committee believes that the lessons learned
from this pilot will inform changes, both pros and cons, under the
reauthorization of the underlying law.
I want to work with the gentleman in the future as this pilot moves
forward. When we have more information, we can potentially, next year,
reexamine this.
I would ask the gentleman if he would withdraw the amendment. I would
certainly be happy to work with him in the future. I know the full
committee chairman is certainly in the interest of him to address the
needs of his constituents. We are certainly sympathetic to that.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GRIFFITH. Mr. Chairman, I certainly have no quarrel with the
committee or the committee chairman or the subcommittee chairman.
I think this is a great pilot project, which was why I thought it was
a brilliant idea, which is why I wanted to at least put this on the
table.
It is not my habit to offer and then withdraw. Sometimes, you lose;
and I understand that is probably the case. I did want to put it on the
table, and I do appreciate the gentleman's kind remarks.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I would just reluctantly oppose this
amendment at this time.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Griffith).
The amendment was rejected.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education

operation of indian programs

(including transfer of funds)

For expenses necessary for the operation of Indian
programs, as authorized by law, including the Snyder Act of
November 2, 1921 (25 U.S.C. 13), the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975 (25 U.S.C.
450 et seq.), the Education Amendments of 1978 (25 U.S.C.
2001-2019), and the Tribally Controlled Schools Act of 1988
(25 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.), $2,505,670,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2017, except as otherwise provided
herein; of which not to exceed $8,500 may be for official
reception and representation expenses; of which not to exceed
$74,809,000 shall be for welfare assistance payments:
Provided, That in cases of designated Federal disasters, the
Secretary may exceed such cap, from the amounts provided
herein, to provide for disaster relief to Indian communities
affected by the disaster: Provided further, That federally
recognized Indian tribes and tribal organizations of
federally recognized Indian tribes may use their tribal
priority allocations for unmet welfare assistance costs:
Provided further, That not to exceed $619,827,000 for school
operations costs of Bureau-funded schools and other education
programs shall become available on July 1, 2016, and shall
remain available until September 30, 2017: Provided further,
That not to exceed $48,785,000 shall remain available until
expended for housing improvement, road maintenance, attorney
fees, litigation support, land records improvement, and the
Navajo-Hopi Settlement Program: Provided further, That any
forestry funds allocated to a federally recognized tribe
which remain unobligated as of September 30, 2017, may be
transferred during fiscal year 2018 to an Indian forest land
assistance account established for the benefit of the holder
of the funds within the holder's trust fund account: Provided
further, That any such unobligated balances not so
transferred shall expire on September 30, 2018: Provided
further, That in order to enhance the safety of Bureau field
employees, the Bureau may use funds to purchase uniforms or
other identifying articles of clothing for personnel:
Provided further, That $272,000,000 shall be for payments to
Indian tribes and tribal organizations for contract support
costs associated with contracts, grants, self-governance
compacts, or annual funding agreements between the Bureau and
an Indian tribe or tribal organization pursuant to the Indian
Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C.
450 et seq.) prior to or during fiscal year 2016, and shall
remain available until expended.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Gosar

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 26, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $50,304,000)''.
Page 62, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $61,304,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Arizona and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

[[Page H4744]]

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer a straightforward
amendment to ensure local schools within the Bureau of Indian Education
have the resources necessary to provide gainful education in quality
facilities at a level on par with their peers in other non-Bureau
funded schools.
This amendment is also offered and supported by a bipartisan group of
my colleagues, including Representatives Cramer, Rokita, Noem,
Kirkpatrick, and Sinema.
Our amendment redirects funds from administrative accounts within the
EPA to the Operation of Indian Programs account with the intent of
those funds going to the BIE and evenly allocated between the education
construction, replacement facilities construction account and the
elementary and secondary programs, facilities operations account.
Currently, more than one-third of Bureau-funded facilities are in
substandard or poor condition. A sizable volume of research, including
investigations by the Government Accountability Office, have
established a direct correlation between facility conditions and poor
student outcomes within the BIE.
The United States Government has trust responsibilities to Indian
tribes and Indian education. This amendment supports the trust
responsibility by helping to provide high-quality education in an
environment that is safe, healthy, and conducive for learning.
I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment. I thank the supporters
of the amendment, and I thank the chairman and ranking member for their
great work on this bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition, although I am not
opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I know there is no doubt that Indian
Country, especially Indian education, is a nonpartisan priority of this
entire subcommittee. We are committed to building upon the bipartisan
work of former subcommittee chairmen Mike Simpson, Jim Moran, Norm
Dicks, and certainly Ranking Member Betty McCollum.
We all agree that there are great needs in Indian Country, especially
in education. In fact, we were in Arizona recently at both the Navajo
and Hopi reservations and saw firsthand the need for education in this
country.
Although I am proud of what we have done for Indian Country in this
bill, that said, I understand where the gentleman is coming from. I
recognize there is so much more to do on Indian education that can and
should be done.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from California and the
ranking member for their help.
I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Rokita), my
friend.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chair, I thank Mr. Gosar, Mr. Calvert, and Ms.
McCollum for their help in all this.
This amendment, which I support, would fund the BIE to the
administration's fiscal year 2016 request, but unlike that request, it
is paid for and adheres to our budget cap.
This year, as the chairman of the Early Childhood, Elementary and
Secondary Education Subcommittee, I have had the opportunity to visit
several BIE schools in Arizona and Minnesota.
During these visits, I have seen firsthand the challenges that the
BIE faces. These challenges consist of crumbling school buildings,
inadequate technology and Internet connectivity, transportation issues,
and inconsistent management.
These are all serious challenges, and they are all well documented by
my official visits, by committee hearings--such as those being done by
Mr. Calvert's subcommittee and mine--by GAO reports, and by the media.
This increase in funds will help address the identified challenges by
providing the resources needed to improve the academic achievement and
increase the graduation rates of Native American students that attend
BIE schools. This is the goal of all of us for Native American
children.
Mr. Chairman, I look at this as a bipartisan issue and appreciate my
colleagues' support of Mr. Gosar's amendment.
Mr. GOSAR. I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their
support and my colleague from Indiana for speaking on behalf of this.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

construction

(including transfer of funds)

For construction, repair, improvement, and maintenance of
irrigation and power systems, buildings, utilities, and other
facilities, including architectural and engineering services
by contract; acquisition of lands, and interests in lands;
and preparation of lands for farming, and for construction of
the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project pursuant to Public Law
87-483, $187,620,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That such amounts as may be available for the
construction of the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project may be
transferred to the Bureau of Reclamation: Provided further,
That not to exceed 6 percent of contract authority available
to the Bureau of Indian Affairs from the Federal Highway
Trust Fund may be used to cover the road program management
costs of the Bureau: Provided further, That any funds
provided for the Safety of Dams program pursuant to 25 U.S.C.
13 shall be made available on a nonreimbursable basis:
Provided further, That for fiscal year 2016, in implementing
new construction, replacement facilities construction, or
facilities improvement and repair project grants in excess of
$100,000 that are provided to grant schools under Public Law
100-297, the Secretary of the Interior shall use the
Administrative and Audit Requirements and Cost Principles for
Assistance Programs contained in 43 CFR part 12 as the
regulatory requirements: Provided further, That such grants
shall not be subject to section 12.61 of 43 CFR; the
Secretary and the grantee shall negotiate and determine a
schedule of payments for the work to be performed: Provided
further, That in considering grant applications, the
Secretary shall consider whether such grantee would be
deficient in assuring that the construction projects conform
to applicable building standards and codes and Federal,
tribal, or State health and safety standards as required by
25 U.S.C. 2005(b), with respect to organizational and
financial management capabilities: Provided further, That if
the Secretary declines a grant application, the Secretary
shall follow the requirements contained in 25 U.S.C. 2504(f):
Provided further, That any disputes between the Secretary and
any grantee concerning a grant shall be subject to the
disputes provision in 25 U.S.C. 2507(e): Provided further,
That in order to ensure timely completion of construction
projects, the Secretary may assume control of a project and
all funds related to the project, if, within 18 months of the
date of enactment of this Act, any grantee receiving funds
appropriated in this Act or in any prior Act, has not
completed the planning and design phase of the project and
commenced construction: Provided further, That this
appropriation may be reimbursed from the Office of the
Special Trustee for American Indians appropriation for the
appropriate share of construction costs for space expansion
needed in agency offices to meet trust reform implementation.

indian land and water claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to
indians

For payments and necessary administrative expenses for
implementation of Indian land and water claim settlements
pursuant to Public Laws 99-264, 100-580, 101-618, 111-11, and
111-291, and for implementation of other land and water
rights settlements, $65,412,000, to remain available until
expended.

indian guaranteed loan program account

For the cost of guaranteed loans and insured loans,
$7,731,000, of which $1,045,000 is for administrative
expenses, as authorized by the Indian Financing Act of 1974:
Provided, That such costs, including the cost of modifying
such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That
these funds are available to subsidize total loan principal,
any part of which is to be guaranteed or insured, not to
exceed $100,496,183.

administrative provisions

The Bureau of Indian Affairs may carry out the operation of
Indian programs by direct expenditure, contracts, cooperative
agreements, compacts, and grants, either directly or in
cooperation with States and other organizations.
Notwithstanding 25 U.S.C. 15, the Bureau of Indian Affairs
may contract for services in support of the management,
operation, and maintenance of the Power Division of the San
Carlos Irrigation Project.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no funds
available to the Bureau of Indian Affairs for central office
oversight and Executive Direction and Administrative Services
(except executive direction and administrative services
funding for Tribal Priority Allocations, regional offices,
and facilities operations and maintenance) shall be available
for contracts, grants, compacts, or

[[Page H4745]]

cooperative agreements with the Bureau of Indian Affairs
under the provisions of the Indian Self-Determination Act or
the Tribal Self-Governance Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-413).
In the event any tribe returns appropriations made
available by this Act to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, this
action shall not diminish the Federal Government's trust
responsibility to that tribe, or the government-to-government
relationship between the United States and that tribe, or
that tribe's ability to access future appropriations.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no funds
available to the Bureau of Indian Education, other than the
amounts provided herein for assistance to public schools
under 25 U.S.C. 452 et seq., shall be available to support
the operation of any elementary or secondary school in the
State of Alaska.
No funds available to the Bureau of Indian Education shall
be used to support expanded grades for any school or
dormitory beyond the grade structure in place or approved by
the Secretary of the Interior at each school in the Bureau of
Indian Education school system as of October 1, 1995, except
that the Secretary of the Interior may waive this prohibition
to support expansion of up to one additional grade when the
Secretary determines such waiver is needed to support
accomplishment of the mission of the Bureau of Indian
Education. Appropriations made available in this or any prior
Act for schools funded by the Bureau shall be available, in
accordance with the Bureau's funding formula, only to the
schools in the Bureau school system as of September 1, 1996,
and to any school or school program that was reinstated in
fiscal year 2012. Funds made available under this Act may not
be used to establish a charter school at a Bureau-funded
school (as that term is defined in section 1141 of the
Education Amendments of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 2021)), except that a
charter school that is in existence on the date of the
enactment of this Act and that has operated at a Bureau-
funded school before September 1, 1999, may continue to
operate during that period, but only if the charter school
pays to the Bureau a pro rata share of funds to reimburse the
Bureau for the use of the real and personal property
(including buses and vans), the funds of the charter school
are kept separate and apart from Bureau funds, and the Bureau
does not assume any obligation for charter school programs of
the State in which the school is located if the charter
school loses such funding. Employees of Bureau-funded schools
sharing a campus with a charter school and performing
functions related to the charter school's operation and
employees of a charter school shall not be treated as Federal
employees for purposes of chapter 171 of title 28, United
States Code.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including
section 113 of title I of appendix C of Public Law 106-113,
if in fiscal year 2003 or 2004 a grantee received indirect
and administrative costs pursuant to a distribution formula
based on section 5(f) of Public Law 101-301, the Secretary
shall continue to distribute indirect and administrative cost
funds to such grantee using the section 5(f) distribution
formula.
Funds available under this Act may not be used to establish
satellite locations of schools in the Bureau school system as
of September 1, 1996, except that the Secretary may waive
this prohibition in order for an Indian tribe to provide
language and cultural immersion educational programs for non-
public schools located within the jurisdictional area of the
tribal government which exclusively serve tribal members, do
not include grades beyond those currently served at the
existing Bureau-funded school, provide an educational
environment with educator presence and academic facilities
comparable to the Bureau-funded school, comply with all
applicable Tribal, Federal, or State health and safety
standards, and the Americans with Disabilities Act, and
demonstrate the benefits of establishing operations at a
satellite location in lieu of incurring extraordinary costs,
such as for transportation or other impacts to students such
as those caused by busing students extended distances:
Provided, That no funds available under this Act may be used
to fund operations, maintenance, rehabilitation, construction
or other facilities-related costs for such assets that are
not owned by the Bureau: Provided further, That the term
``satellite school'' means a school location physically
separated from the existing Bureau school by more than 50
miles but that forms part of the existing school in all other
respects: Provided further, That none of the funds made
available by this or any other Act may be used by the
Secretary to finalize, implement, administer, or enforce the
proposed rule entitled ``Federal Acknowledgement of American
Indian Tribes'' published by the Department of the Interior
in the Federal Register on May 29, 2014 (79 Fed. Reg. 30766
et seq.).

Departmental Offices

Office of the Secretary

departmental operations

For necessary expenses for management of the Department of
the Interior, including the collection and disbursement of
royalties, fees, and other mineral revenue proceeds, and for
grants and cooperative agreements, as authorized by law,
$717,279,000, to remain available until September 30, 2017;
of which not to exceed $15,000 may be for official reception
and representation expenses; and of which up to $1,000,000
shall be available for workers compensation payments and
unemployment compensation payments associated with the
orderly closure of the United States Bureau of Mines; and of
which $8,128,000 for the Office of Valuation Services is to
be derived from the Land and Water Conservation Fund and
shall remain available until expended; and of which
$38,300,000 shall remain available until expended for the
purpose of mineral revenue management activities: Provided,
That notwithstanding any other provision of law, $15,000
under this heading shall be available for refunds of
overpayments in connection with certain Indian leases in
which the Secretary concurred with the claimed refund due, to
pay amounts owed to Indian allottees or tribes, or to correct
prior unrecoverable erroneous payments.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Sablan

Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 36, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $5,000,000)''.
Page 38, line 6, after each of the first and second dollar
amounts, insert ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from the Northern Mariana Islands and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from the Northern Mariana Islands.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Chairman, my amendment increases funding for
territorial assistance initiatives managed by the Interior Department.
The assistance benefits the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, which I represent, but also the United States territories of
American Samoa, Guam, and the United States Virgin Islands, as well as
America's allies in the Pacific, the Republic of Palau, the Federated
States of Micronesia, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands.

{time} 1530

The assistance will continue our commitment to help all of these
areas to develop economically and become more self-sufficient.
Mr. Chairman, much remains to reach these goals. The 2010 Census
revealed that poverty levels in the islands remain three to five times
the national average, and median income in the Northern Marianas is
only $20,000 compared to $53,000 nationwide.
The most recent gross domestic product data for the islands, reported
by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, found that in the Virgin Islands,
real GDP declined 5.4 percent in 2013 and declined 2.4 percent in
American Samoa. In contrast, the real GDP for the United States,
excluding the territories, increased 2.2 percent in 2013. So we have a
lot of catching up to do.
Interior has been very responsible in recent years, focusing
technical assistance funds in a way that really will help our areas
develop economically. I am thinking in particular of the Empowering
Insular Communities program, which is helping us move imported fuels--
that are costly and take money out of our economies--to greater use of
locally available energy sources.
I am thinking about the Insular Areas: Assessment of Buildings and
Classrooms Initiative, just like the preceding amendment. This program
found that only 38 percent of insular schools are in acceptable
condition and identified specifically those schools where there are
safety hazards for students. The ABC Initiative is systematically
upgrading that infrastructure so our children have schools that are
conducive to learning and are safe. Developing those human resources is
the surest way to raise our economy. We need to give Interior the
resources to continue--and finish--that initiative.
The additional $5 million my amendment provides can be used for these
or any of the other territorial assistance programs, such as the Coral
Reef Initiative, brown tree snake control, or compact impact to areas
negatively affected by United States immigration policies.
Mr. Chairman, all of these programs are works in progress. We should
provide more funding for them, and technical assistance funding should
remain focused on programs that the Department has already begun and
invested in. I appreciate the past support for the program and, even in
these challenging fiscal times, I urge your support for increased
funding for assistance to territories for fiscal year 2016.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H4746]]

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to the gentleman's
amendment. I want the gentleman to know that I understand that the
territories would benefit greatly from additional funding. We funded
the assistance to territories at the FY15-enacted levels. We level-
funded that because we know that the money is needed, and we know that
we have responsibilities in the territories. However, the offset right
now, we have cut back that particular operation considerably, so I
would oppose that offset. But I would be more than happy to work with
the gentleman as we move this process along, along with the ranking
member, to see if we can't get additional funds as we move this process
along.
Mr. Chairman, I certainly appreciate the gentleman's intent, but we
would have to reluctantly oppose this amendment at this time, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate very much the chairman's offer to work
with me because I will look him up and work with him and his
subcommittee. But let me just make a small point here of what this
technical assistance money means to us.
The States are eligible for thousands of Federal programs that help
States do one thing or another, from social to educational to
infrastructure projects. For the territories, there are only 700-some
programs where the territories are eligible. So there is a difference.
So this small pot of technical assistance money is a program that
provides grants to help the territories pick themselves up and wipe off
the dust. It is just a small amount of money. Five million goes a long
way, Mr. Chairman, when it is fixing the schools that the Army Corps
has already identified. I understand there are 1,500 school buildings,
and 62 percent of them are not safe, and only 38 percent are declared
safe. So just like we do for the Bureau of Indian Education, we are
also asking that we increase this money.
So I will also work with the chair, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment, and I yield back
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from the Northern Mariana Islands (Mr. Sablan).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from the Northern
Mariana Islands will be postponed.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the fact that the chairman
is looking towards working more for putting dollars into Indian
education, as Mr. Gosar's amendment did, and the bipartisan way in
which this bill has been proceeding forward, and I yield to the
chairman.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I am more than happy to work with the
young lady to get additional funding for Indian education at any time
in the future, and we can continue to work together to do that.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Chairman, I also appreciate the Parliamentarian's patience and
the majority's patience while we get another copy of the amendment
presented to the body for consideration. I thank everyone for their
courtesy.
Mr. Chairman, Minnesota is a great State, and we would like to have
the gentleman from California there so the gentleman can see our great
lakes and our great water.
I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, could the gentlewoman please ship some of
that water to California?
Ms. McCOLLUM. Reclaiming my time and my water, we would love to have
the gentleman there, and when the water is very hard, it freezes, and
then the gentleman can try ice fishing, which is a great sport.
Mr. Chair, I think the amendment is coming to the desk. Once more, I
thank you very much for your patience, and I yield back the balance of
my time.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Castor of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 36, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $1,913,000)''.
Page 62, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,913,000)''.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the
gentlewoman's motion.
The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentlewoman from Florida and a
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the House's
consideration.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to restore
brownfields funding to fiscal year 2015 levels and to make the point
that when we help redevelop contaminated properties, we generate a
large return on investments that lift our communities back home.
My amendment increases EPA's Environmental Programs and Management
account by a modest $1.9 million to be offset by the same amount from
the Office of the Secretary. Even with this modest boost, the proposed
bill on the floor, unfortunately, would remain $4 million below the
budget request.
Mr. Chairman, when a contaminated property achieves a brownfields
designation and a grant, local communities and businesses can clean up
the property and put the property back into use. This type of economic
redevelopment is key to our neighborhoods and communities, rural or
urban. It increases property values and creates jobs with just a little
bit of seed money from the EPA through brownfields.
A 2014 study concluded that cleaning up brownfields leads to nearby
residential property value increases of 4.9 to 11 percent. Another 2007
study found that an average of 10 jobs are created for every acre of
brownfields redevelopment. And based on historical data, we know that
$1 of the EPA's brownfields funding leverages between $17 and $18 in
other public and private financing.
Mr. Chairman, I have witnessed great success in brownfields
redevelopment back home in the Tampa Bay area. For example, when the
existence of the Old Mercy Hospital in Midtown St. Petersburg was in
jeopardy due to environmental contamination on the site, the city of
St. Petersburg and the EPA stepped in to turn the Old Mercy Hospital
into a flourishing community health center. The project created 80
jobs, saved existing jobs, created new jobs, and it stands now as the
Johnnie Ruth Clarke Community Health Center, which is the linchpin to
Midtown St. Petersburg community redevelopment efforts.
Similarly, in Tampa, the Tampa Family Health Centers have redeveloped
a number of brownfields sites, including one on the site of a closed
car dealership, that have had a very positive impact beyond the health
care of thousands and thousands of my neighbors in a severely
underserved area. It is one of the primary examples of the growing
healthfields initiative which targets redevelopment through brownfields
to help improve access to health services for our neighbors.
Mr. Chairman, the return on investment is so great across America.
The Congress must invest much more in our communities, and brownfields
redevelopment is simply smart policy, especially in places where these
resources are scarce. It is also a critical part of EPA's environmental
justice efforts and its Environmental Justice 2020 Action Agenda
framework. When the EPA released its Environmental Justice 2020
framework, I convened local community leaders across the Tampa Bay area
to solicit their opinions, and brownfields redevelopment was at the top
of their list.

[[Page H4747]]

Mr. Chairman, we can do better here, and I hope as the appropriations
process goes on we will find ways to help communities redevelop with
this small seed money through the brownfields initiative.
I would like to thank Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum. I
urge my colleagues to support the Castor amendment to revitalize our
communities back home, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the
point of order.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I wish the gentlewoman was able to share
this amendment with both the majority and the minority in the committee
where we could have reviewed it. But saying that, I still must oppose
the amendment because of the offset.
Mr. Chairman, the offset obviously would take money from the
Secretary and move it over to the EPA, and at this time we have used
the Secretary's Office tremendously as an offset already, and I am
afraid that this may start affecting other programs within the
Department of the Interior. So I would have to oppose this amendment.
The gentlewoman's amendment won't increase the cleanup of a
brownfields site, it will only pay for salaries over at the EPA, and I
believe that we don't need to do any more for the EPA than has already
been done.
So with that, Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Chairman, this is an important account to
beef up. Remember, we are under the sequester caps, and then we are $4
million under the budget request even with this amendment.
Now, the Secretary's Office is the best place to go for an offset.
The Secretary's account is $452 million above fiscal year 2015 levels
and $389 million above the budget request.

{time} 1545

I would put to you that it would be a better investment for our
communities back home to allow them this little seed money, this little
matching money, to redevelop properties, rather than fund the
bureaucracy at the EPA.
I urge approval of the Castor amendment, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on
this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Florida
will be postponed.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

administrative provisions

For fiscal year 2016, up to $400,000 of the payments
authorized by the Act of October 20, 1976 (31 U.S.C. 6901-
6907) may be retained for administrative expenses of the
Payments in Lieu of Taxes Program: Provided, That no payment
shall be made pursuant to that Act to otherwise eligible
units of local government if the computed amount of the
payment is less than $100: Provided further, That the
Secretary may reduce the payment authorized by 31 U.S.C.
6901-6907 for an individual county by the amount necessary to
correct prior year overpayments to that county: Provided
further, That the amount needed to correct a prior year
underpayment to an individual county shall be paid from any
reductions for overpayments to other counties and the amount
necessary to cover any remaining underpayment is hereby
appropriated and shall be paid to individual counties:
Provided further, That of the total amount made available by
this title for ``Office of the Secretary--Departmental
Operations'', $452,000,000 shall be available to the
Secretary of the Interior for an additional amount for fiscal
year 2016 for payments in lieu of taxes under chapter 69 of
title 31, United States Code.

Insular Affairs

assistance to territories

For expenses necessary for assistance to territories under
the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior and other
jurisdictions identified in section 104(e) of Public Law 108-
188, $85,976,000, of which: (1) $76,528,000 shall remain
available until expended for territorial assistance,
including general technical assistance, maintenance
assistance, disaster assistance, coral reef initiative
activities, and brown tree snake control and research; grants
to the judiciary in American Samoa for compensation and
expenses, as authorized by law (48 U.S.C. 1661(c)); grants to
the Government of American Samoa, in addition to current
local revenues, for construction and support of governmental
functions; grants to the Government of the Virgin Islands as
authorized by law; grants to the Government of Guam, as
authorized by law; and grants to the Government of the
Northern Mariana Islands as authorized by law (Public Law 94-
241; 90 Stat. 272); and (2) $9,448,000 shall be available
until September 30, 2017, for salaries and expenses of the
Office of Insular Affairs: Provided, That all financial
transactions of the territorial and local governments herein
provided for, including such transactions of all agencies or
instrumentalities established or used by such governments,
may be audited by the Government Accountability Office, at
its discretion, in accordance with chapter 35 of title 31,
United States Code: Provided further, That Northern Mariana
Islands Covenant grant funding shall be provided according to
those terms of the Agreement of the Special Representatives
on Future United States Financial Assistance for the Northern
Mariana Islands approved by Public Law 104-134: Provided
further, That the funds for the program of operations and
maintenance improvement are appropriated to institutionalize
routine operations and maintenance improvement of capital
infrastructure with territorial participation and cost
sharing to be determined by the Secretary based on the
grantee's commitment to timely maintenance of its capital
assets: Provided further, That any appropriation for disaster
assistance under this heading in this Act or previous
appropriations Acts may be used as non-Federal matching funds
for the purpose of hazard mitigation grants provided pursuant
to section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170c).

Amendment Offered by Ms. Plaskett

Ms. PLASKETT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to
H.R. 2822.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 38, line 6, after the second dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $13,684,000) (increased by $13,684,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentlewoman
from the Virgin Islands and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands.
Ms. PLASKETT. Mr. Chairman, as one of the five Members of Congress
representing America's offshore territories and as the Representative
from the U.S. Virgin Islands, I am disappointed to see the underfunding
made to the FY16 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations bill.
Aside from the underfunding to environmental protection programs that
protect important natural resources and, among a myriad of things,
assures Americans have access to clean water, the cuts to this bill
come largely at the expense of America's island territories.
The Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, and the
Northern Marianas have been a part of this great Nation for more than a
century. Since then, this country has augmented the support to critical
areas of activity by the respective local governments in these
territories.
This is done, largely in part, through the Interior's territorial
assistance activity, in which this bill proposes to underfund by
$13,684,000.
Mr. Chairman, this is unacceptable. Funding through Interior's
territorial assistance activity go toward many important functions in
these territories, like capital improvement projects. These capital
improvement projects, CIP, funds address a variety of infrastructure
needs in the U.S. territories, including critical infrastructure such
as hospitals, schools, wastewater, and solid waste systems.
For example, funding through CIP helped the Virgin Islands Waste
Management Authority complete the repair of a severely deteriorated
force main water line that threatened to leak in nearby ocean water.

[[Page H4748]]

Improvements to critical infrastructure not only benefit the current
population of these territories and the businesses that invest in those
communities, but lay the groundwork to attract new investment to the
territories, which promotes economic development and self-sufficiency.
An example of the importance of this funding to the territories is
highlighted in the fiscal year '16 budget request, in which my home
district, the U.S. Virgin Islands, proposes to use approximately $2
million to address health and safety deferred maintenance items that
have been identified in Interior's insular assessment of buildings and
classrooms initiative. This is imperative, as our schools are not
structurally sound or conducive to the healthy learning environment.
Many of the schools in the Virgin Islands are overrun with mold and
have severe structural deficiencies, some of which are over a half a
century old.
The St. Croix Central High School had to close its doors last year
because of noxious odors that made teachers and students sick. This
recurring incident began midway through the 2013 school year and forced
the entire student body of more than 1,000 students to join a similarly
populated high school in double session for the remainder of the school
year.
This coming fall, the Virgin Islands government will again close
schools on the island of St. Croix, but this time, students from three
schools will be relocated to other schools for at least an entire
school year, maybe longer, while the local government works to repair
the severely decrepit buildings that house those young people.
Mr. Chairman, there hasn't been a school built in the U.S. Virgin
Islands in the last two decades. The children in my home district, as
well as in the other five territories, deserve better and need the
assistance afforded through this funding.
A breakdown of CIP expenditures in 2014 underscores how important
this funding is to not only students in our territories, but also to
our senior citizens as well. Construction or repair to schools and
hospitals account for nearly half the total amount of CIP expenditures
last year.
In St. Croix, our hospital is without an adequate mental health
facility, as well as St. Thomas, and there are few assisted living
facilities and a growing population of aging citizens.
The U.S. Virgin Islands also proposes to use $1 million in 2016 CIP
funding for structural renovations and equipment upgrades at a variety
of public libraries on the islands of St. Croix, St. Thomas, and St.
John. These repairs and upgrades will help provide a safe, secure, and
comfortable location for citizens to use library archives and public
resources.
Mr. Chairman, the people living in America's island territories are
citizens of this great Nation, the same as people living in Alaska,
Hawaii, and the 48 contiguous States. We are constitutionally entitled
to fair and equal representation and full inclusion by this House, as
well as by this government.
I look forward to continuing to work on this issue.
Mr. Chairman, I want to also point out that unlike the States, the
Virgin Islands and the other territories are not part of the formula
grants that the other locations have. We do not receive the same
funding for grants, programs that provide technical assistance, jobs,
or infrastructure.
In fact, today, with the announcement of the Supreme Court, while we
are thankful for the rest of the United States, with the Affordable
Care Act, we are not included in it to the full extent the other States
are.
I am asking, Mr. Chairman, at this time, that this body, as well as
this Congress and, in fact, the Federal Government, look to the Virgin
Islands and look to including us and all of the territories in full
inclusion.
Mr. Chairman, at this time, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

compact of free association

For grants and necessary expenses, $3,318,000, to remain
available until expended, as provided for in sections
221(a)(2) and 233 of the Compact of Free Association for the
Republic of Palau; and section 221(a)(2) of the Compacts of
Free Association for the Government of the Republic of the
Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia, as
authorized by Public Law 99-658 and Public Law 108-188.

Administrative Provisions

(including transfer of funds)

At the request of the Governor of Guam, the Secretary may
transfer discretionary funds or mandatory funds provided
under section 104(e) of Public Law 108-188 and Public Law
104-134, that are allocated for Guam, to the Secretary of
Agriculture for the subsidy cost of direct or guaranteed
loans, plus not to exceed three percent of the amount of the
subsidy transferred for the cost of loan administration, for
the purposes authorized by the Rural Electrification Act of
1936 and section 306(a)(1) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act for construction and repair projects in Guam,
and such funds shall remain available until expended:
Provided, That such costs, including the cost of modifying
such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That such
loans or loan guarantees may be made without regard to the
population of the area, credit elsewhere requirements, and
restrictions on the types of eligible entities under the
Rural Electrification Act of 1936 and section 306(a)(1) of
the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act: Provided
further, That any funds transferred to the Secretary of
Agriculture shall be in addition to funds otherwise made
available to make or guarantee loans under such authorities.

Office of the Solicitor

salaries and expenses

For necessary expenses of the Office of the Solicitor,
$65,142,000.

Office of Inspector General

salaries and expenses

For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General,
$50,047,000.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 41, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.
On page 102, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,500,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentlewoman
from Texas and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me thank the chair and the ranking
member of this appropriations process for the Interior and Environment
for their indulgence and their understanding of how much a part of the
lives of Americans this legislation is from my amendment dealing with
the culture and history of this Nation to that of clean water, clean
air, our Federal parks, our forestry. This is a vital piece of the
livelihood and the life of America.
Among other agencies that the legislation funds is the Smithsonian
Institution, which operates our national museums, including the Air and
Space Museum, the Museum of African Art, the American Art Museum, and
the National Portrait Gallery. It also operates the national treasure,
the National Zoo.
My amendment is simple. It sends a very important message from the
Congress of the United States to infuse into the people cultural and
appreciation for the respect and holding of wild animals, for the
forests, for the number of assets that we should hold very dear, and it
increases the Smithsonian Institution by $1.5 million.
Mr. Chairman, the Smithsonian's outreach programs bring scholars in
art, history, and science out of the Nation's attic and into their own
backyard. Each year, millions of Americans visit the Smithsonian.
In order to fill the Smithsonian's mission, the increase and
diffusion of knowledge, the Smithsonian seeks to serve on an even
greater audience by bringing it to the communities, to the people who
otherwise would be deprived, or the institutions that would otherwise
be deprived of this kind of cultural exchange.
This money is not a lot of money, but it is an important statement
for those who seek to be connected to the cultural history of America.
The Smithsonian's outreach program serves millions of Americans,
thousands of communities, and hundreds of institutions in all 50 States
through

[[Page H4749]]

loans of objects, traveling exhibitions, and sharing of educational
resources.
Smithsonian outreach programs work in close cooperation with
Smithsonian museums and research centers, as well as with 144 affiliate
institutions, and others across the Nation. Smithsonian outreach
activities support community-based cultural and educational
organizations.
It reaches out to African Americans, Asian Americans, Latino
Americans, Native Americans, new Americans, and all Americans from
kindergarten to college to our senior citizens.
What can we do to help this outreach expand? We can provide this
simple amendment of $1.5 million to create more mobile museums talking
about the extensive history that we have. These mobile museums then
connect with our museums that we have.
The African American Museum in Houston is one of those that needs the
bridge that the Smithsonian has. It is a museum that has reached
prominence, but not the ability to reach a lot of people. This is an
opportunity to boost the Smithsonian in order to ensure that we have
that kind of outreach.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to the
gentlewoman's amendment only because of the offset.
The offset that we are talking about is taking money of the inspector
general's office, which is our auditors, and we desperately need
auditors in the Federal Government. We, as appropriators, are very
reluctant to cut the inspector general's office in general.
I want to work with the gentlewoman. I recognize her passion to make
sure that the good work that the Smithsonian does gets out to the
general community throughout the United States. I am a big supporter of
the Smithsonian. We have level-funded the Smithsonian Institution this
year. Obviously, we are operating under difficult budget constraints.
We certainly support what the gentlewoman wants to do; we just don't
support the offset in which she wants to do it with.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CALVERT. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. I think we have had an opportunity to be on the
floor together over the years. Thank you so very much. I want to thank
the ranking member and the leadership on the committee.
My question would be--obviously, this appropriations process is a
bill here in the House and then there is conference--what would be the
immediate strategy of working with you on this goal that we both would
have?
I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. CALVERT. We will continue to work with the gentlewoman as this
process moves forward and with the ranking member, Ms. McCollum.
Who knows, there may be something that happens between A and B, and
we may have some additional resources, who knows; but we will certainly
work with you to find out if we do.
I know that if we can help the Smithsonian Institution out, it is
really at the top of our list.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
Let me, first of all, thank the ranking member for all the hard work
that has been done and the chairman. It is a passion for reaching out
and touching museums like the Houston African American Museum that has,
as its curator, an excellent leader in John Guess.
I would say to museums like that to allow me to take up the chairman
and the ranking member's leadership and begin to look for what may be
an extra opportunity to infuse dollars to get the culture of America to
reach out to all over.
With that, in the spirit of collaboration and collegiality, I am
going to at this time withdraw in a friendly manner the Jackson Lee
amendment with a very hopeful commitment to be able to help museums
like the Houston African American Museum and many others that really
benefit from this connection.

{time} 1600

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentlewoman for her generosity, and I will
continue to work with her as this process moves forward.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Texas has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me just say, in concluding, there
are many things that this bill does. I am hoping that we will rid
ourselves of sequester to let it do more, and one of the things would
be this outreach that brings us together as a Nation in a positive way.
I cannot say good accolades about Houston museums in general, the
Buffalo Soldiers National Museum, the Houston African American Museum
that has a great purpose, and other museums that I hope we can address
the Smithsonian's outreach capability.
Mr. Chair, thank you for this opportunity to speak in support of my
amendment to H.R. 2822, the ``Interior and Environment Appropriations
Act of 2016.''
Let me also thank Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for
their leadership in shepherding this bill to the floor.
Among other agencies, this legislation funds the Smithsonian
Institution, which operates our national museums, including the Air and
Space Museum; the Museum of African Art; the Museum of the American
Indian; and the National Portrait Gallery.
The Smithsonian also operates another national treasure: the National
Zoo.
Mr. Chair, my amendment is simple but it sends a very important
message from the Congress of the United States.
The Jackson Lee Amendment provides that increases funding for the
Smithsonian Institution by $1.5 million to fund outreach programs
administered by the Smithsonian Institution.
Mr. Chair, the Smithsonian's outreach programs bring Smithsonian
scholars in art, history and science out of ``the nation's attic'' and
into their own backyard.
Each year, millions of Americans visit the Smithsonian in Washington,
D.C.
But in order to fulfill the Smithsonian's mission, ``the increase and
diffusion of knowledge,'' the Smithsonian seeks to serve an even
greater audience by bringing the Smithsonian to enclaves of communities
who otherwise would be deprived of the vast amount of cultural history
offered by the Smithsonian.
The Smithsonian's outreach programs serve millions of Americans,
thousands of communities, and hundreds of institutions in all 50
states, through loans of objects, traveling exhibitions, and sharing of
educational resources via publications, lectures and presentations,
training programs, and websites.
Smithsonian outreach programs work in close cooperation with
Smithsonian museums and research centers, as well as with 144 affiliate
institutions and others across the nation.
The Smithsonian's outreach activities support community-based
cultural and educational organizations around the country.
They ensure a vital, recurring, and high-impact Smithsonian presence
in all 50 states through the provision of traveling exhibitions and a
network of affiliations.
Smithsonian outreach programs increase connections between the
Institution and targeted audiences (African American, Asian American,
Latino, Native American, and new American) and provide kindergarten
through college-age museum education and outreach opportunities.
These outreach programs enhance K-12 science education programs,
facilitate the Smithsonian's scholarly interactions with students and
scholars at universities, museums, and other research institutions; and
disseminate results related to the research and collections strengths
of the Institution.
The programs that provide the critical mass of Smithsonian outreach
activity are:
1. the Smithsonian Institution Traveling Exhibition Service (SITES);
2. the Smithsonian Affiliations, the Smithsonian Center for Education
and Museum Studies (SCEMS);
3. National Science Resources Center (NSRC);
4. the Smithsonian Institution Press (SIP);
5. the Office of Fellowships (OF); and
6. the Smithsonian Associates (TSA), which receives no federal
funding.
To achieve the goal of increasing public engagement, SITES directs
some of its federal resources to develop Smithsonian Across America: A
Celebration of National Pride.
This ``mobile museum,'' which will feature Smithsonian artifacts from
the most iconic (presidential portraits, historic American flags, Civil
War records, astronaut uniforms, etc.) to the simplest items of
everyday life (family quilts, prairie schoolhouse furnishings, historic
lunch boxes, multilingual store front and street

[[Page H4750]]

signs, etc.), has been a long-standing organizational priority of the
Smithsonian.
SITES ``mobile museum'' is the only traveling exhibit format able to
guarantee audience growth and expanded geographic distribution during
sustained periods of economic retrenchment, but also because it is
imperative for the many exhibitors nationwide who are struggling
financially yet eager to participate in Smithsonian outreach.
For communities still struggling to fully recover from the economic
downturn, the ability of museums to present temporary exhibitions, the
``mobile museum'' promises to answer an ever-growing demand for
Smithsonian shows in the field.
A single, conventional SITES exhibit can reach a maximum of 12
locations over a two- to three-year period.
In contrast, a ``mobile museum'' exhibit can visit up to three venues
per week in the course of only one year, at no cost to the host
institution or community.
The net result is an increase by 150 in the number of outreach
locations to which SITES shows can travel annually.
And in addition to its flexibility in making short-term stops in
cities and towns from coast-to-coast, a ``mobile museum'' has the
advantage of being able to frequent the very locations where people
live, work, and take part in leisure time activities.
By establishing an exhibit presence in settings like these, SITES
will not only increase its annual visitor participation by 1 million,
but also advance a key Smithsonian performance objective: to develop
exhibit approaches that address diverse audiences, including population
groups not always affiliated with mainstream cultural institutions.
SITES also will be the public exhibitions' face of the Smithsonian's
National Museum of African American History and Culture, as that new
Museum comes online.
Providing national access to projects that will introduce the
American public to the Museum's mission, SITES in FY 2008 will tour
such stirring exhibitions as NASA ART: 50 Years of Exploration; 381
Days: The Montgomery Bus Boycott Story; Beyond: Visions of Planetary
Landscapes; The Way We Worked: Photographs from the National Archives;
and More Than Words: Illustrated Letters from the Smithsonian's
Archives of American Art.
To meet the growing demand among smaller community and ethnic museums
for an exhibition celebrating the Latino experience, SITES provided a
scaled-down version of the National Museum of American History's 4,000-
square-foot exhibition about legendary entertainer Celia Cruz.
Two 1,500-square-foot exhibitions, one about Crow Indian history and
the other on basket traditions, will give Smithsonian visitors beyond
Washington a taste of the Institution's critically acclaimed National
Museum of the American Indian.
Two more exhibits, ``In Plane View'' and ``Earth from Space,''
provided visitors an opportunity to experience the Smithsonian's
recently opened, expansive National Air and Space Museum Udvar-Hazy
Center.
For almost 30 years, The Smithsonian Associates--the highly regarded
educational arm of the Smithsonian Institution--has arranged Scholars
in the Schools programs.
Through this tremendously successful and well-received educational
outreach program, the Smithsonian shares its staff--hundreds of experts
in art, history and science--with the national community at a local
level.
The mission of Smithsonian Affiliations is to build a strong national
network of museums and educational organizations in order to establish
active and engaging relationships with communities throughout the
country.
There are currently 138 affiliates located in the United States,
Puerto Rico, and Panama.
By working with museums of diverse subject areas and scholarly
disciplines, both emerging and well-established, Smithsonian
Affiliations is building partnerships through which audiences and
visitors everywhere will be able to share in the great wealth of the
Smithsonian while building capacity and expertise in local communities.
The National Science Resources Center (NSRC) strives to increase the
number of ethnically diverse students participating in effective
science programs based on NSRC products and services.
The Center develops and implements a national outreach strategy that
will increase the number of school districts (currently more than 800)
that are implementing NSRC K-8 programs.
The NSRC is striving to further enhance its program activity with a
newly developed scientific outreach program introducing communities and
school districts to science through literacy initiatives.
In addition, through the building of the multicultural Alliance
Initiative, the Smithsonian's outreach programs seek to develop new
approaches to enable the public to gain access to Smithsonian
collections, research, education, and public programs that reflect the
diversity of the American people, including underserved audiences of
ethnic populations and persons with disabilities.
For all these reasons, Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of my amendment and
thank Chairman Dicks and Ranking Member Tiahrt for their courtesies,
consideration, and very fine work in putting together this excellent
legislation.
I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment at this time and
begin to work the process to provide funding to the Smithsonian for
that purpose.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Texas?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians

federal trust programs

(including transfer of funds)

For the operation of trust programs for Indians by direct
expenditure, contracts, cooperative agreements, compacts, and
grants, $139,029,000, to remain available until expended, of
which not to exceed $22,120,000 from this or any other Act,
may be available for historical accounting: Provided, That
funds for trust management improvements and litigation
support may, as needed, be transferred to or merged with the
Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education,
``Operation of Indian Programs'' account; the Office of the
Solicitor, ``Salaries and Expenses'' account; and the Office
of the Secretary, ``Departmental Operations'' account:
Provided further, That funds made available through contracts
or grants obligated during fiscal year 2016, as authorized by
the Indian Self-Determination Act of 1975 (25 U.S.C. 450 et
seq.), shall remain available until expended by the
contractor or grantee: Provided further, That,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary
shall not be required to provide a quarterly statement of
performance for any Indian trust account that has not had
activity for at least 15 months and has a balance of $15 or
less: Provided further, That the Secretary shall issue an
annual account statement and maintain a record of any such
accounts and shall permit the balance in each such account to
be withdrawn upon the express written request of the account
holder: Provided further, That not to exceed $50,000 is
available for the Secretary to make payments to correct
administrative errors of either disbursements from or
deposits to Individual Indian Money or Tribal accounts after
September 30, 2002: Provided further, That erroneous payments
that are recovered shall be credited to and remain available
in this account for this purpose: Provided further, That the
Secretary shall not be required to reconcile Special Deposit
Accounts with a balance of less than $500 unless the Office
of the Special Trustee receives proof of ownership from a
Special Deposit Accounts claimant.

Department-wide Programs

wildland fire management

(including transfers of funds)

For necessary expenses for fire preparedness, fire
suppression operations, fire science and research, emergency
rehabilitation, hazardous fuels management activities, and
rural fire assistance by the Department of the Interior,
$804,795,000, to remain available until expended, of which
not to exceed $6,127,000 shall be for the renovation or
construction of fire facilities: Provided, That such funds
are also available for repayment of advances to other
appropriation accounts from which funds were previously
transferred for such purposes: Provided further, That of the
funds provided $164,000,000 is for hazardous fuels management
activities: Provided further, That of the funds provided
$18,035,000 is for burned area rehabilitation: Provided
further, That persons hired pursuant to 43 U.S.C. 1469 may be
furnished subsistence and lodging without cost from funds
available from this appropriation: Provided further, That
notwithstanding 42 U.S.C. 1856d, sums received by a bureau or
office of the Department of the Interior for fire protection
rendered pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1856 et seq., protection of
United States property, may be credited to the appropriation
from which funds were expended to provide that protection,
and are available without fiscal year limitation: Provided
further, That using the amounts designated under this title
of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior may enter into
procurement contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements, for
hazardous fuels management and resilient landscapes
activities, and for training and monitoring associated with
such hazardous fuels management and resilient landscapes
activities on Federal land, or on adjacent non-Federal land
for activities that benefit resources on Federal land:
Provided further, That the costs of implementing any
cooperative agreement between the Federal Government and any
non-Federal entity may be shared, as mutually agreed on by
the affected parties: Provided further, That notwithstanding
requirements of the Competition in Contracting Act, the
Secretary, for purposes of hazardous fuels management and
resilient landscapes activities, may obtain maximum
practicable competition among: (1) local private, nonprofit,
or cooperative entities; (2) Youth Conservation Corps crews,
Public Lands Corps (Public

[[Page H4751]]

Law 109-154), or related partnerships with State, local, or
nonprofit youth groups; (3) small or micro-businesses; or (4)
other entities that will hire or train locally a significant
percentage, defined as 50 percent or more, of the project
workforce to complete such contracts: Provided further, That
in implementing this section, the Secretary shall develop
written guidance to field units to ensure accountability and
consistent application of the authorities provided herein:
Provided further, That funds appropriated under this heading
may be used to reimburse the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service for the
costs of carrying out their responsibilities under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) to
consult and conference, as required by section 7 of such Act,
in connection with wildland fire management activities:
Provided further, That the Secretary of the Interior may use
wildland fire appropriations to enter into leases of real
property with local governments, at or below fair market
value, to construct capitalized improvements for fire
facilities on such leased properties, including but not
limited to fire guard stations, retardant stations, and other
initial attack and fire support facilities, and to make
advance payments for any such lease or for construction
activity associated with the lease: Provided further, That
the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of
Agriculture may authorize the transfer of funds appropriated
for wildland fire management, in an aggregate amount not to
exceed $50,000,000, between the Departments when such
transfers would facilitate and expedite wildland fire
management programs and projects: Provided further, That
funds provided for wildfire suppression shall be available
for support of Federal emergency response actions: Provided
further, That funds appropriated under this heading shall be
available for assistance to or through the Department of
State in connection with forest and rangeland research,
technical information, and assistance in foreign countries,
and, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, shall be
available to support forestry, wildland fire management, and
related natural resource activities outside the United States
and its territories and possessions, including technical
assistance, education and training, and cooperation with
United States and international organizations.

flame wildfire suppression reserve fund

(including transfer of funds)

For necessary expenses for large fire suppression
operations of the Department of the Interior and as a reserve
fund for suppression and Federal emergency response
activities, $92,000,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That such amounts are only available for transfer
to the ``Wildland Fire Management'' account following a
declaration by the Secretary in accordance with section 502
of the FLAME Act of 2009 (43 U.S.C. 1748a).

central hazardous materials fund

For necessary expenses of the Department of the Interior
and any of its component offices and bureaus for the response
action, including associated activities, performed pursuant
to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.), $10,010,000, to
remain available until expended.

natural resource damage assessment and restoration

natural resource damage assessment fund

To conduct natural resource damage assessment, restoration
activities, and onshore oil spill preparedness by the
Department of the Interior necessary to carry out the
provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.), the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.),
the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.), and
Public Law 101-337 (16 U.S.C. 19jj et seq.), $7,689,000, to
remain available until expended.

working capital fund

For the operation and maintenance of a departmental
financial and business management system, information
technology improvements of general benefit to the Department,
and the consolidation of facilities and operations throughout
the Department, $56,529,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated in
this Act or any other Act may be used to establish reserves
in the Working Capital Fund account other than for accrued
annual leave and depreciation of equipment without prior
approval of the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and the Senate: Provided further, That the
Secretary may assess reasonable charges to State, local and
tribal government employees for training services provided by
the National Indian Program Training Center, other than
training related to Public Law 93-638: Provided further, That
the Secretary may lease or otherwise provide space and
related facilities, equipment or professional services of the
National Indian Program Training Center to State, local and
tribal government employees or persons or organizations
engaged in cultural, educational, or recreational activities
(as defined in section 3306(a) of title 40, United States
Code) at the prevailing rate for similar space, facilities,
equipment, or services in the vicinity of the National Indian
Program Training Center: Provided further, That all funds
received pursuant to the two preceding provisos shall be
credited to this account, shall be available until expended,
and shall be used by the Secretary for necessary expenses of
the National Indian Program Training Center: Provided
further, That the Secretary may enter into grants and
cooperative agreements to support the Office of Natural
Resource Revenue's collection and disbursement of royalties,
fees, and other mineral revenue proceeds, as authorized by
law.

administrative provision

There is hereby authorized for acquisition from available
resources within the Working Capital Fund, aircraft which may
be obtained by donation, purchase or through available excess
surplus property: Provided, That existing aircraft being
replaced may be sold, with proceeds derived or trade-in value
used to offset the purchase price for the replacement
aircraft.

General Provisions, Department of the Interior

(including transfers of funds)

emergency transfer authority--intra-bureau

Sec. 101. Appropriations made in this title shall be
available for expenditure or transfer (within each bureau or
office), with the approval of the Secretary, for the
emergency reconstruction, replacement, or repair of aircraft,
buildings, utilities, or other facilities or equipment
damaged or destroyed by fire, flood, storm, or other
unavoidable causes: Provided, That no funds shall be made
available under this authority until funds specifically made
available to the Department of the Interior for emergencies
shall have been exhausted: Provided further, That all funds
used pursuant to this section must be replenished by a
supplemental appropriation, which must be requested as
promptly as possible.

emergency transfer authority--department-wide

Sec. 102. The Secretary may authorize the expenditure or
transfer of any no year appropriation in this title, in
addition to the amounts included in the budget programs of
the several agencies, for the suppression or emergency
prevention of wildland fires on or threatening lands under
the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior; for the
emergency rehabilitation of burned-over lands under its
jurisdiction; for emergency actions related to potential or
actual earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, storms, or other
unavoidable causes; for contingency planning subsequent to
actual oil spills; for response and natural resource damage
assessment activities related to actual oil spills or
releases of hazardous substances into the environment; for
the prevention, suppression, and control of actual or
potential grasshopper and Mormon cricket outbreaks on lands
under the jurisdiction of the Secretary, pursuant to the
authority in section 417(b) of Public Law 106-224 (7 U.S.C.
7717(b)); for emergency reclamation projects under section
410 of Public Law 95-87; and shall transfer, from any no year
funds available to the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement, such funds as may be necessary to permit
assumption of regulatory authority in the event a primacy
State is not carrying out the regulatory provisions of the
Surface Mining Act: Provided, That appropriations made in
this title for wildland fire operations shall be available
for the payment of obligations incurred during the preceding
fiscal year, and for reimbursement to other Federal agencies
for destruction of vehicles, aircraft, or other equipment in
connection with their use for wildland fire operations, such
reimbursement to be credited to appropriations currently
available at the time of receipt thereof: Provided further,
That for wildland fire operations, no funds shall be made
available under this authority until the Secretary determines
that funds appropriated for ``wildland fire operations'' and
``FLAME Wildfire Suppression Reserve Fund'' shall be
exhausted within 30 days: Provided further, That all funds
used pursuant to this section must be replenished by a
supplemental appropriation, which must be requested as
promptly as possible: Provided further, That such
replenishment funds shall be used to reimburse, on a pro rata
basis, accounts from which emergency funds were transferred.

authorized use of funds

Sec. 103. Appropriations made to the Department of the
Interior in this title shall be available for services as
authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code,
when authorized by the Secretary, in total amount not to
exceed $500,000; purchase and replacement of motor vehicles,
including specially equipped law enforcement vehicles; hire,
maintenance, and operation of aircraft; hire of passenger
motor vehicles; purchase of reprints; payment for telephone
service in private residences in the field, when authorized
under regulations approved by the Secretary; and the payment
of dues, when authorized by the Secretary, for library
membership in societies or associations which issue
publications to members only or at a price to members lower
than to subscribers who are not members.

authorized use of funds, indian trust management

Sec. 104. Appropriations made in this Act under the
headings Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian
Education, and Office of the Special Trustee for American
Indians and any unobligated balances from prior
appropriations Acts made under the same headings shall be
available for expenditure or

[[Page H4752]]

transfer for Indian trust management and reform activities.
Total funding for historical accounting activities shall not
exceed amounts specifically designated in this Act for such
purpose.

redistribution of funds, bureau of indian affairs

Sec. 105. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary of the Interior is authorized to redistribute any
Tribal Priority Allocation funds, including tribal base
funds, to alleviate tribal funding inequities by transferring
funds to address identified, unmet needs, dual enrollment,
overlapping service areas or inaccurate distribution
methodologies. No tribe shall receive a reduction in Tribal
Priority Allocation funds of more than 10 percent in fiscal
year 2016. Under circumstances of dual enrollment,
overlapping service areas or inaccurate distribution
methodologies, the 10 percent limitation does not apply.

ellis, governors, and liberty islands

Sec. 106. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary of the Interior is authorized to acquire lands,
waters, or interests therein including the use of all or part
of any pier, dock, or landing within the State of New York
and the State of New Jersey, for the purpose of operating and
maintaining facilities in the support of transportation and
accommodation of visitors to Ellis, Governors, and Liberty
Islands, and of other program and administrative activities,
by donation or with appropriated funds, including franchise
fees (and other monetary consideration), or by exchange; and
the Secretary is authorized to negotiate and enter into
leases, subleases, concession contracts or other agreements
for the use of such facilities on such terms and conditions
as the Secretary may determine reasonable.

outer continental shelf inspection fees

Sec. 107. (a) In fiscal year 2016, the Secretary shall
collect a nonrefundable inspection fee, which shall be
deposited in the ``Offshore Safety and Environmental
Enforcement'' account, from the designated operator for
facilities subject to inspection under 43 U.S.C. 1348(c).
(b) Annual fees shall be collected for facilities that are
above the waterline, excluding drilling rigs, and are in
place at the start of the fiscal year. Fees for fiscal year
2016 shall be:
(1) $10,500 for facilities with no wells, but with
processing equipment or gathering lines;
(2) $17,000 for facilities with 1 to 10 wells, with any
combination of active or inactive wells; and
(3) $31,500 for facilities with more than 10 wells, with
any combination of active or inactive wells.
(c) Fees for drilling rigs shall be assessed for all
inspections completed in fiscal year 2016. Fees for fiscal
year 2016 shall be:
(1) $30,500 per inspection for rigs operating in water
depths of 500 feet or more; and
(2) $16,700 per inspection for rigs operating in water
depths of less than 500 feet.
(d) The Secretary shall bill designated operators under
subsection (b) within 60 days, with payment required within
30 days of billing. The Secretary shall bill designated
operators under subsection (c) within 30 days of the end of
the month in which the inspection occurred, with payment
required within 30 days of billing.

bureau of ocean energy management, regulation and enforcement
reorganization

Sec. 108. The Secretary of the Interior, in order to
implement a reorganization of the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management, Regulation and Enforcement, may transfer funds
among and between the successor offices and bureaus affected
by the reorganization only in conformance with the
reprogramming guidelines described in the report accompanying
this Act.

contracts and agreements for wild horse and burro holding facilities

Sec. 109. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act,
the Secretary of the Interior may enter into multiyear
cooperative agreements with nonprofit organizations and other
appropriate entities, and may enter into multiyear contracts
in accordance with the provisions of section 3903 of title
41, United States Code (except that the 5-year term
restriction in subsection (a) shall not apply), for the long-
term care and maintenance of excess wild free roaming horses
and burros by such organizations or entities on private land.
Such cooperative agreements and contracts may not exceed 10
years, subject to renewal at the discretion of the Secretary.

mass marking of salmonids

Sec. 110. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service
shall, in carrying out its responsibilities to protect
threatened and endangered species of salmon, implement a
system of mass marking of salmonid stocks, intended for
harvest, that are released from federally operated or
federally financed hatcheries including but not limited to
fish releases of coho, chinook, and steelhead species. Marked
fish must have a visible mark that can be readily identified
by commercial and recreational fishers.

exhaustion of administrative review

Sec. 111. Section 122(a)(1) of division E of Public Law
112-74 (125 Stat. 1013) is amended by striking ``fiscal years
2012 through 2016'' and inserting ``fiscal year 2012 and each
fiscal year thereafter''.

wild lands funding prohibition

Sec. 112. None of the funds made available in this Act or
any other Act may be used to implement, administer, or
enforce Secretarial Order No. 3310 issued by the Secretary of
the Interior on December 22, 2010.

bureau of indian education operated schools

Sec. 113. Section 115(d) of division E of Public Law 112-
74 (25 U.S.C. 2000 note) is amended by striking ``2017'' and
inserting ``2027''.

volunteers in parks

Sec. 114. Section 102301(d) of title 54, United States
Code, is amended by striking ``$3,500,000'' and inserting
``$7,000,000''.

contracts and agreements with indian affairs

Sec. 115. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
during fiscal year 2016, in carrying out work involving
cooperation with State, local, and tribal governments or any
political subdivision thereof, Indian Affairs may record
obligations against accounts receivable from any such
entities, except that total obligations at the end of the
fiscal year shall not exceed total budgetary resources
available at the end of the fiscal year.

heritage areas

Sec. 116. (a) Section 157(h)(1) of title I of Public Law
106-291 (16 U.S.C. 461 note) is amended by striking
``$11,000,000'' and inserting ``$13,000,000''.
(b) Division II of Public Law 104-333 (16 U.S.C. 461 note)
is amended--
(1) in sections 409(a), 508(a), and 812(a) by striking
``$15,000,000'' and inserting ``$17,000,000''; and
(2) in sections 208, 310, and 607 by striking ``2015'' and
inserting ``2017''.

sage-grouse

Sec. 117. None of the funds made available by this or any
other Act may be used by the Secretary of the Interior to
write or issue pursuant to section 4 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533)--
(1) a proposed rule for greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus
urophasianus);
(2) a proposed rule for the Columbia basin distinct
population segment of greater sage-grouse.

offshore pay authority extension

Sec. 118. Section 117 of division G of Public Law 113-76
is amended by striking ``and 2015'' and inserting ``through
2017''.

onshore pay authority extension

Sec. 119. Section 123 of division G of Public Law 113-76
is amended by striking ``and 2015'' and inserting ``through
2017''.

ivory

Sec. 120. None of the funds made available by this or any
other Act may be used to draft, prepare, implement, or
enforce any new or revised regulation or order that--
(1) prohibits or restricts, within the United States, the
possession, sale, delivery, receipt, shipment, or
transportation of ivory that has been lawfully imported into
the United States;
(2) changes any means of determining, including any
applicable presumptions concerning, when ivory has been
lawfully imported; or
(3) prohibits or restricts the importation of ivory that
was lawfully importable into the United States as of February
1, 2014.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Grijalva

Mr. GRIJALVA. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Bishop of Michigan). The Clerk will report the
amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Beginning at page 59, line 9, strike section 120.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Arizona and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, last week, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service destroyed a 1-ton stockpile of illegal elephant ivory. Most of
it was seized up from a Philadelphia antique dealer named Victor
Gordon.
For at least 9 years, Gordon imported and sold ivory from freshly
killed African elephants in violation of U.S. law and the laws of the
countries where the elephants were poached and the ivory stolen.
How did he get away with this for so long? The ivory was doctored so
that it looked old enough to pass through a loophole in the enforcement
of the African Elephant Conservation Act, a law that was passed in 1989
to end the commercial import and export of ivory.
While a ton of ivory was confiscated, there is no way to know how
much Gordon had sold during the previous decade or where it is now. All
we know for certain is all of it was illegal, all of it is nearly
impossible to distinguish from antique ivory, and anyone who bought it
from Gordon, resells it, or buys it from a new owner is contributing to
the ongoing slaughter of elephants and the criminal trafficking of
ivory that supports organized crime and terrorism.

[[Page H4753]]

This has got to stop. How many more Victor Gordons are out there? The
amount is a question that can't be answered. The amount of ivory seized
from his shop represents 100 elephants, roughly the same number killed
every day in Africa.
The photo we wanted to enlarge was a photo of an Africa elephant that
had been killed and its head decapitated and the ivory butchered out of
its head. Upon review, it was decided that it was too graphic and
disturbing for the Chamber and for the floor, and we didn't bring that
one.
While much of this poaching is fueled by demand for ivory in Asia, a
significant black market exists in the United States, as evidenced by
the Gordon case and similar State level investigations in New York City
and elsewhere.
The only way--and I repeat--the only way to keep U.S. citizens from
being involved, whether knowingly or unknowingly, in this elephant
poaching and trafficking crisis is to close the enforcement loopholes
and eliminate the commercial import, export, and trade of Africa
elephant ivory in this country.
That is precisely what the Obama administration is trying to do by
proposing new rules to limit ivory trade in the United States. Instead
of assisting in this important cause, House Republicans have slipped a
rider into the appropriations bill to kill the new rule before it is
even finalized.
My amendment would remove this rider. Ending the commercial ivory
trade does not mean taking away people's musical instruments, as some
have said, ivory-handled pistols, or family heirlooms. Museum
collections, scientific specimens, and sport-hunted trophies will also
be allowed to move freely. Further, items containing very small amounts
of ivory can be bought and sold.
Profiteering off elephant parts will no longer be allowed, nor should
it be. As long as ivory has monetary value, people will kill elephants
to get it. Eliminating value will eliminate demand and that will reduce
wildlife poaching and trafficking.
I understand the administration's proposed ivory rule is due out very
shortly, and in the interest of giving everyone a chance to review that
rule, I will withdraw this amendment today.
However, I will not hesitate to return with a similar amendment later
if that is what it takes to remove this damaging rider from the bill.
I ask, Mr. Chairman, unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Arizona?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Reissuance of Final Rules

Sec. 121. Before the end of the 60-day period beginning on
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the
Interior shall reissue the final rule published on December
28, 2011 (76 Fed. Reg. 81666 et seq.) and the final rule
published on September 10, 2012 (77 Fed. Reg. 55530 et seq.),
without regard to any other provision of statute or
regulation that applies to issuance of such rules. Such
reissuances (including this section) shall not be subject to
judicial review.

northern long-eared bat

Sec. 122. Before the end of the 60-day period beginning on
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the
Interior shall amend the interim rule pertaining to the
northern long-eared bat published by the Department of the
Interior in the Federal Register on April 2, 2015 (80 Fed.
Reg. 17974 et seq.), only in such a way that--
(1) take incidental to any activity conducted in accordance
with the habitat conservation measures identified at pages
18024 to 18205 of volume 80 of the Federal Register (April 2,
2015), as applicable, is not prohibited; and
(2) the public comment period for such interim rule is
reopened for not less than 90 days.

echinoderms

Sec. 123. Section 14.21(a)(1) of title 50, Code of Federal
Regulations, is amended by inserting ``, including
echinoderms commonly known as sea urchins and sea
cucumbers,'' after ``products''.

TITLE II--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Science and Technology

For science and technology, including research and
development activities, which shall include research and
development activities under the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980; necessary
expenses for personnel and related costs and travel expenses;
procurement of laboratory equipment and supplies; and other
operating expenses in support of research and development,
$704,918,000, to remain available until September 30, 2017:
Provided, That of the funds included under this heading,
$7,100,000 shall be for Research: National Priorities as
specified in the report accompanying this Act.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Langevin

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 61, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $1,625,000)''.
Page 62, lines 8 and 13, after each dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Rhode Island and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Rhode Island.
Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
This amendment, which I am offering with my good friends, Mr. Keating
and Mr. Cicilline, will provide $1 million to the southern New England
estuaries geographic program. This program was funded at $5 million
last year and has been incredibly successful at leveraging resources,
bringing stakeholders together, and increasing efficiencies.
Estuaries are essential for healthy coastal ecosystems. They provide
benefits of great economic and ecologic significance, including vital
nesting and feeding habitats for aquatic plants and animals; yet they
are increasingly affected by impacts of human activity along our
coasts. These funds will be used to continue efforts to protect and
restore our coasts and estuaries, which are critical for our
environment and our economy.
The southern New England estuaries geographic program supports
projects and science to restore the health of southeastern New
England's estuaries watersheds and coastal waters and ensure access now
and in the future to resilient, self-sustaining ecosystems and
associated populations of our fish and shellfish.
I would like to take a moment to say that the account that we are
reallocating from, EPA science and technology, is also critically
important. While we would have liked to offer an amendment increasing
the southern New England estuary geographic program to its full funding
amount of $5 million, there were neither sufficient nor appropriate
offsets in this bill to do so.
Mr. Chair, I hope that as our appropriators go to conference with the
Senate, they are able to restore the full funding amount of $5 million
for this important program.
I would also like to thank Congressman Keating, along with
Congressman Cicilline, for being tremendous partners in ensuring that
our southern New England estuaries are restored and stay healthy for
generations to come.
I would like to thank Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum, and
their staffs who worked on this bill.
I urge my colleagues to support the funding for the southern New
England estuary geographic program.
I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), my good
friend and colleague, to speak on the amendment.

{time} 1615

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague and friend for
yielding.
I also would like to express my gratitude to Mr. Keating, who
unfortunately could not be with us today, for his hard work on this
important issue, and I thank my colleague from Rhode Island (Mr.
Langevin) for his elegant words.
Mr. Chairman, the estuaries in Narragansett Bay in Rhode Island and
Buzzards Bay in Massachusetts face significant environmental
challenges, many shared by estuaries across the country. These
challenges include rivers and streams that are disconnected from the
landscape, the loss of critical wetlands, the impacts of centuries of
urbanization and development, and aging infrastructure.
Southern New England estuaries are especially threatened by these
challenges. Yet despite the harm that we know is being done to our
estuaries, southern New England was the only geographic region in this
bill which saw

[[Page H4754]]

all of its estuary funding eliminated. While some geographic regions
were underfunded compared to fiscal year 2016 requests, most requests
for geographic regions were either met or, in some cases, increased.
Inexplicably, it was only southern New England that was singled out for
complete elimination of funding for the next fiscal year.
This amendment would restore a modest $1 million funding for southern
New England estuaries program, as Congressman Langevin said. Then, at
conference, we hope that full funding is restored.
The southern New England watershed has experienced more than 400
years of ecological degradation, which is further exacerbated by the
effects of climate change. Rivers and waterways have become
disconnected from the watershed, which has led to the absorption of
nitrogen and other pollutants from sources such as septic systems,
treatment plants, and storm water runoff.
The funding provided to these geographic programs allows for
essential collaboration between Federal entities, nonprofit and
academic institutions, and other private entities to formulate
innovative solutions and to produce new technologies to create cleaner
and clearer waterways. For example, in fiscal year 2014, more than
$65,000 in grants was awarded to the Narragansett Bay watershed. This
funded projects run by Save the Bay in my district, including an
education and awareness project for residents and businesses on
Aquidneck Island as well as a partnership program involving the Rhode
Island Coastal Resources Management Council to facilitate site visits
to more than 200 shoreline rights-of-way to determine any needed levels
of improvement to public access.
Programs like these have proven to be effective. In fact, the
Narragansett Bay Estuary Program was awarded a 2015 Environmental Merit
Award from EPA New England for outstanding contributions on behalf of
southern New England's public health and natural environment. These
collaborative efforts throughout the southern New England region with
continued funding will help to support projects to protect ecological
habitats, foster self-sustaining ecosystems, and protect wildlife.
Federal collaboration and investment is essential to helping local
communities apply for and receive funding.
I thank my colleague from Rhode Island and my colleague from
Massachusetts for the great work they have done on this issue.
I urge passage of this amendment by all of my colleagues.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition, but I don't
oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. CALVERT. I would be happy to work with the gentlemen, and I would
urge acceptance of this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his support of
the amendment as well as my colleague and Mr. Keating. As I said, this
is such an important amendment. It includes important funding for
protecting our ecosystems.
I urge passage of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Environmental Programs and Management

For environmental programs and management, including
necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, for personnel
and related costs and travel expenses; hire of passenger
motor vehicles; hire, maintenance, and operation of aircraft;
purchase of reprints; library memberships in societies or
associations which issue publications to members only or at a
price to members lower than to subscribers who are not
members; administrative costs of the brownfields program
under the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields
Revitalization Act of 2002; and not to exceed $9,000 for
official reception and representation expenses,
$2,472,289,000, to remain available until September 30, 2017:
Provided, That of the funds included under this heading,
$12,700,000 shall be for Environmental Protection: National
Priorities as specified in the report accompanying this Act:
Provided further, That of the funds included under this
heading, $403,523,000 shall be for Geographic Programs
specified in the report accompanying this Act.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Grayson

Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 62, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $2,212,000) (increased by $2,212,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Florida and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Calvert and his
staff for working with me on this amendment. It simply seeks to
decrease and then increase by the same amount within the $2.5 billion
appropriation for the environmental programs and management account
within the Environmental Protection Agency. More specifically, my
amendment seeks to remove and then reapply $2.2 million from that
account.
The intent behind my amendment is simple. It is to put the House on
record of supporting a final funding amount of $27,310,000 for the
National Estuary Program and coastal waterways.
Currently, the report accompanying this bill calls for $25,098,000
for the National Estuary Program and coastal waterways, which is
$2,212,000 below both the Senate's proposed appropriations level and
the President's request for fiscal year 2016. Hence, the amount
specified in my amendment.
The National Estuary Program and coastal waterways subaccount within
the EPA does important work, including work in my State, especially on
the Atlantic Coast. It addresses ocean acidification, seeks to remove
coastal watersheds, furthers the National Estuary Program's restoration
goals, and assists in the implementation of the very important Gulf of
Mexico hypoxia action plan.
Mr. Chairman, there is an area, a large area called the dead zone off
of Louisiana that literally stinks. It has no fish. It has no
recreational opportunities. It has no fishing. It is, in fact, a scar
on the face of the Earth. Part of the funding for this program is used
to try to overcome the hypoxia situation that has arisen off the coast
of Louisiana that threatens to spread not only to Texas, Alabama, and
Mississippi, but also to the coast of my State of Florida, eventually,
if we do nothing about it.
The estuarine regions of the United States comprise just 12 percent
of land area of the United States, but they contain 43 percent of the
U.S. population and provide 49 percent of all U.S. economic output. The
economic value of coastal recreation alone in the United States--beach
going, fishing, bird watching, snorkeling, diving, and so on--has
conservatively been estimated by NOAA to be between $20 billion and $60
billion annually.
Clearly, the $2.2 million increase in funding for the National
Estuary Program and coastal waterways that I am seeking will result in
dramatic returns for the American economy, an enhanced quality of life
for the American people, and eliminate that scar on the face of planet
Earth that exists off the coast of Louisiana and should never be
allowed to spread.
Mr. Chairman, I know that you support this amendment, and I am
thankful for your support. With that in mind, I will stop talking
before I lose your support.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Mooney of West Virginia

Mr. MOONEY of West Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 62, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $2,000,000)''.
Page 62, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from West Virginia and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

[[Page H4755]]

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from West Virginia.
Mr. MOONEY of West Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an
amendment to the fiscal year 2016 Interior Appropriations bill that
will help strengthen transparency and oversight at the Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA. My amendment simply provides $1 million in
additional funding for the Office of Inspector General at the EPA.
I thank Chairman Ken Calvert for working with me on this amendment.
Under the current administration, the EPA has waged an all-out war on
jobs in the beautiful Second District of West Virginia and on
communities across America. With this backdrop, I think it is
absolutely critical that we strengthen oversight and transparency at
the EPA. Taxpayers deserve to know what is going on behind the curtain.
The Office of the Inspector General plays a critical oversight role
within the EPA. It is the independent office that works diligently to
root out waste, fraud, and abuse. For example, a May 28, 2015, report
found that two separate EPA employees were viewing pornography at work
for up to 6 hours a day, and they were paid in the neighborhood of
$120,000 a year while doing it.
The same report found that Renee Page, who at the time was Director
of the EPA's Office of Administration, allegedly sold jewelry and
weight loss pills out of her office. But she didn't stop there with her
abuses. She hired not one, not two, but 17 family members and friends
for paid internships at the EPA.
These are just two examples of the incredible abuses of public trust
and of taxpayer dollars that occur at the EPA. Without rigorous
oversight from the inspector general, these abuses might never have
been exposed.
My amendment provides additional oversight funding without increasing
the budgetary impact of the fiscal year 2016 Interior Appropriations
bill. We pull the money from the Office of Public Affairs, which is the
office responsible for promoting the administration's radical
environmental agenda, and use it instead for oversight.
I would encourage my colleagues today to cast their vote in favor of
my amendment.
Mr. CALVERT. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MOONEY of West Virginia. I yield to the gentleman from
California.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I would be happy to support this
amendment. I appreciate the gentleman's bringing it up, and I encourage
everyone to adopt it.
Mr. MOONEY of West Virginia. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mooney).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Mooney of West Virginia

Mr. MOONEY of West Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 62, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $2,000,000)''.
Page 132, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from West Virginia and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from West Virginia.
Mr. MOONEY of West Virginia. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would
strike $2 million in funding from the Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Policy and transfer those funds to the deficit reduction
account.
The Office of Policy is located within the EPA Office of the
Administrator and is the primary policy arm for the Agency, or what I
have been calling the regulatory nerve center. The funding for this
office directly supports this administration's radical regulatory
agenda that is putting an alarming number of my constituents out of
work, and they are not shy about it.
The head of the EPA's Office of Policy, Joel Beauvais, on October 13,
2014, boasted to a group of New York University law students that his
office ``coordinates the process through which all of the EPA's rules
are developed, including the clean power plan.''
Well, the so-called clean power plan is projected to increase energy
costs by as much as $479 billion over the next 15 years. For my
constituents in the beautiful Second District of West Virginia, that
means an average electricity price increase of 12 percent. This is
something we cannot afford. Yesterday, on the floor of this Chamber, we
passed the ratepayer protection plan, which will stop the clean power
plan, but the Office of Policy is coordinating more than just the clean
power plan. The EPA issues about 150 new regulations each year, and
this office is right at the center.
Another rule that deserves attention is the EPA's proposed ozone
standard. The National Association of Manufacturers found that this new
regulation could reduce the United States' GDP by $207 billion to $360
billion annually, leading to 2.9 million fewer jobs between now and
2040.
It is clear that the EPA, under this administration, will continue to
promote their radical environmentalist agenda through an enormous
number of rules and regulations. We have to slow this process, and that
is why I propose this amendment to cut the Office of Policy funding by
$2 million. I would encourage my colleagues today to cast their vote in
favor of my amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5
minutes.

{time} 1630

Ms. McCOLLUM. The gentleman's amendment would cut $2 million from the
Office of Policy and Program and put the savings into the so-called
spending reduction account. If enacted, this would cut an already
barebones bill that is plagued by policy riders and further erode our
environment.
I am concerned that this cut could have great influence on what the
policy division does in its relationship in working with States and
divisions within States, community assistance, and its research
division.
I would also point out to my colleagues that the spending reduction
account has never been enacted into law in the 4 years it has been
proposed, so there really isn't an account I know of that has been
authorized where this fund could go.
I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and to keep the Office
of Policy able to do its work that impacts on our States and local
community.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. MOONEY of West Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman
from California (Mr. Calvert).
Mr. CALVERT. I agree with the gentleman's amendment. I would urge its
adoption.
Mr. MOONEY of West Virginia. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mooney).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Tipton

Mr. TIPTON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 62, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $20,000,000)''.
Page 79, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $20,000,000)''.
Page 80, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $20,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Colorado and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. TIPTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would like to thank Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum
for their collaborative efforts in putting together this bill that
carefully and thoughtfully allocates limited resources in order to
conserve and restore our Nation's precious natural resources.
As you know, States across the Nation, especially those in the West,
face widespread drought and deteriorating forest health conditions, all
of which increase the risk of catastrophic wildfires and the tragic
loss of life and property.

[[Page H4756]]

Furthermore, these forest health conditions and the wildfires wreak
havoc on species habitat; recreational economies; critical
infrastructure; and clean, abundant water supplies.
In 2014, the Forest Service and the Department of the Interior
agencies spent over $1.5 million in fire suppression costs to combat
fires on more than $3.5 million acres of private, State, and Federal
lands.
These suppression costs will only continue to rise if we do not
appropriately address the critical issues of wildfire preparation,
including hazardous fuel management activities.
For far too long, we have been addressing the problem after the fact.
That course of action has led to decades of declining healthy forests
and a staggering increase in the occurrence of catastrophic wildfires,
putting people, communities, and ecosytems at risk.
In fiscal year 2015, Congress provided a $75 million increase for
hazardous fuels management. I applaud Chairman Calvert and my
colleagues for spearheading these efforts, but we can do more.
Today, I am offering a simple amendment that will bolster the
wildfire management system account on the National Forest System lands
by $20 million, allowing the Forest Service to be able to expand
ongoing work on hazardous fuels reduction and fire mitigation projects.
Quite simply, the cost of proactive healthy forest management is far
less than the cost of wildfire suppression and cleaning up devastating
aftermaths.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr.
Pearce), a cosponsor of this legislation.
Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from Colorado
bringing this amendment.
In the West, we are finding that our States are being burned up. They
are burned up because the forests are simply full of fuel that has not
been cut or logged for the last 20, 30 years. These are internal
decisions that were created by an inappropriate listing of the spotted
owl, declaring that timber reduction was the reason the spotted owl was
going extinct.
A couple of years ago, the Fish and Wildlife Service reversed that,
saying: Oops, logging had nothing to do with it.
It doesn't matter. Now, the damage is done. Our forests are chock-
full of fuels. It has been extraordinarily dry through the West. Small
sparks set off tremendous blazes. The wind always blows in the West. We
find these raging while fires that weren't in existence 30, 40, and 50
years ago because nature was pretty well in harmony.
The idea of the gentleman is simply to put more money into the fuels
reduction account. That is a commonsense solution that will save us in
the West, save our valuable resources, save our valuable forests, and
it will make sense for the country.
I support the amendment and would urge its adoption.
Mr. TIPTON. I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert),
the chairman.
Mr. CALVERT. I certainly agree with you. We need to improve the
condition of our national forests. My home of California, as you know,
is going through an exceptional drought. Colorado is just not sending
enough water down the Colorado River, so you need to help us out a
little bit.
This hazardous fuel issue is a huge issue in my area. As you know, we
have the blight issue that is just killing trees because we have too
many trees in the forests, and it has weakened the forests.
This is a good amendment, and I certainly urge its adoption.
Mr. TIPTON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Maine is recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, while I certainly appreciate the challenges
that so many Western States are facing right now with the drought and
very frightening wildfires, I need to oppose this.
Unlike most programs in H.R. 2822, especially within the Forest
Service, the base hazardous fuels program received a $10 million
increase above the FY 2015 enacted level.
There is a reduction in H.R. 2822 to the biomass grant portion of the
hazardous fuels program, but I see nothing in this amendment that
addresses that cut.
We would all like to see increases in funding for many programs
funded by the bill. Chairman Calvert has certainly been a strong
advocate for a robust wildland fire program, including hazardous fuels.
Coming from the fire-prone State of California, as he just mentioned,
he knows as well as anyone that our fire programs needs support, and he
has funded that accordingly.
To provide what would be a record level of funding for hazardous
fuels, the sponsor of this amendment would cut an additional $20
million from the EPA, which is why I feel it is important to oppose
this amendment.
This bill already severely cuts the EPA's main operating account by
$141.4 million, or 5 percent. I strongly oppose an amendment that takes
more money from the already starved EPA. The very air we breathe and
the water we drink are endangered by the funding and policy decisions
made in this bill, and their consequences will be negatively felt in
communities across this Nation.
I know cutting EPA is an easy target for many of my colleagues across
the aisle, but I want to make sure that my colleagues understand what
this amendment would cut if it was adopted.
This account funds programs that are important to both sides of the
aisle, including permitting for construction projects across the
country, toxics risk prevention, the cleanup of toxic waste sites,
pesticide licensing, and radiation prevention.
EPA's work goes beyond the political talking point of scary
regulations and is necessary to keep vulnerable populations safe from
environmental disasters. It is beyond reason, frankly, to cut the very
Federal employees that have ably responded to the disasters such as the
BP oil spill and the coal ash spill in Kingston, Tennessee, in 2008.
I do not support gutting the EPA further, and I oppose this
amendment. I urge my colleagues to do the same.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. TIPTON. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado has 1 minute remaining.
Mr. TIPTON. Mr. Chairman, the current Environmental Protection Agency
likes to applaud itself that it is a champion of clean air and clean
water. For those of us who live in the West, this is not a political
talking point. This is reality.
If you care about clean air, think about the carbon that is emitted
from wildfires. Think about the devastation to the wildlife habitat as
our forests burn. Think about clean water as ash is washed down through
the ravines into very narrow watersheds where we have endangered
species residing as well.
I would submit, Mr. Chairman, that we actually put action through our
words in terms of being proactive and in terms of addressing forest
health. If you care about clean water, if you care about endangered
species, if you care about clean air, this is an opportunity to
actually allow us to be able to move the ball forward, to be able to
address what the Environmental Protection Agency says it is about--that
is clean air, clean water.
This amendment will help achieve that goal, and encourage my
colleagues to adopt it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tipton).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Office of Inspector General

For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General
in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act
of 1978, $40,000,000, to remain available until September 30,
2017.

Buildings and Facilities

For construction, repair, improvement, extension,
alteration, and purchase of fixed equipment or facilities of,
or for use by, the Environmental Protection Agency,
$34,467,000, to remain available until expended.

[[Page H4757]]

Hazardous Substance Superfund

(including transfers of funds)

For necessary expenses to carry out the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 (CERCLA), including sections 111(c)(3), (c)(5), (c)(6),
and (e)(4) (42 U.S.C. 9611) $1,088,769,000, to remain
available until expended, consisting of such sums as are
available in the Trust Fund on September 30, 2015, as
authorized by section 517(a) of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) and up to $1,088,769,000
as a payment from general revenues to the Hazardous Substance
Superfund for purposes as authorized by section 517(b) of
SARA: Provided, That funds appropriated under this heading
may be allocated to other Federal agencies in accordance with
section 111(a) of CERCLA: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, $8,459,000 shall be paid to
the ``Office of Inspector General'' appropriation to remain
available until September 30, 2017, and $16,217,000 shall be
paid to the ``Science and Technology'' appropriation to
remain available until September 30, 2017.

Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund Program

For necessary expenses to carry out leaking underground
storage tank cleanup activities authorized by subtitle I of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act, $91,941,000, to remain
available until expended, of which $66,572,000 shall be for
carrying out leaking underground storage tank cleanup
activities authorized by section 9003(h) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act; $25,369,000 shall be for carrying out the other
provisions of the Solid Waste Disposal Act specified in
section 9508(c) of the Internal Revenue Code: Provided, That
the Administrator is authorized to use appropriations made
available under this heading to implement section 9013 of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act to provide financial assistance to
federally recognized Indian tribes for the development and
implementation of programs to manage underground storage
tanks.

Inland Oil Spill Programs

For expenses necessary to carry out the Environmental
Protection Agency's responsibilities under the Oil Pollution
Act of 1990, $17,944,000, to be derived from the Oil Spill
Liability trust fund, to remain available until expended.

State and Tribal Assistance Grants

For environmental programs and infrastructure assistance,
including capitalization grants for State revolving funds and
performance partnership grants, $2,979,829,000, to remain
available until expended, of which--
(1) $1,018,000,000 shall be for making capitalization
grants for the Clean Water State Revolving Funds under title
VI of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act; and of which
$757,000,000 shall be for making capitalization grants for
the Drinking Water State Revolving Funds under section 1452
of the Safe Drinking Water Act: Provided, That for fiscal
year 2016, funds made available under this title to each
State for Clean Water State Revolving Fund capitalization
grants and for Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
capitalization grants may, at the discretion of each State,
be used for projects to address green infrastructure, water
or energy efficiency improvements, or other environmentally
innovative activities: Provided further, That notwithstanding
section 603(d)(7) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
the limitation on the amounts in a State water pollution
control revolving fund that may be used by a State to
administer the fund shall not apply to amounts included as
principal in loans made by such fund in fiscal year 2016 and
prior years where such amounts represent costs of
administering the fund to the extent that such amounts are or
were deemed reasonable by the Administrator, accounted for
separately from other assets in the fund, and used for
eligible purposes of the fund, including administration:
Provided further, That for fiscal year 2016, notwithstanding
the limitation on amounts in section 518(c) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, up to a total of 2 percent of
the funds appropriated, or $30,000,000, whichever is greater,
and notwithstanding the limitation on amounts in section
1452(i) of the Safe Drinking Water Act, up to a total of 2
percent of the funds appropriated, or $20,000,000, whichever
is greater, for State Revolving Funds under such Acts may be
reserved by the Administrator for grants under section 518(c)
and section 1452(i) of such Acts: Provided further, That for
fiscal year 2016, notwithstanding the amounts specified in
section 205(c) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, up
to 1.5 percent of the aggregate funds appropriated for the
Clean Water State Revolving Fund program under the Act less
any sums reserved under section 518(c) of the Act, may be
reserved by the Administrator for grants made under title II
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act for American
Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, and
United States Virgin Islands: Provided further, That for
fiscal year 2016, notwithstanding the limitations on amounts
specified in section 1452(j) of the Safe Drinking Water Act,
up to 1.5 percent of the funds appropriated for the Drinking
Water State Revolving Fund programs under the Safe Drinking
Water Act may be reserved by the Administrator for grants
made under section 1452(j) of the Safe Drinking Water Act:
Provided further, That 10 percent of the funds made available
under this title to each State for Clean Water State
Revolving Fund capitalization grants and 20 percent of the
funds made available under this title to each State for
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund capitalization grants
shall be used by the State to provide additional subsidy to
eligible recipients in the form of forgiveness of principal,
negative interest loans, or grants (or any combination of
these), and shall be so used by the State only where such
funds are provided as initial financing for an eligible
recipient or to buy, refinance, or restructure the debt
obligations of eligible recipients only where such debt was
incurred on or after the date of enactment of this Act;
(2) $5,000,000 shall be for architectural, engineering,
planning, design, construction and related activities in
connection with the construction of high priority water and
wastewater facilities in the area of the United States-Mexico
Border, after consultation with the appropriate border
commission; Provided, That no funds provided by this
appropriations Act to address the water, wastewater and other
critical infrastructure needs of the colonias in the United
States along the United States-Mexico border shall be made
available to a county or municipal government unless that
government has established an enforceable local ordinance, or
other zoning rule, which prevents in that jurisdiction the
development or construction of any additional colonia areas,
or the development within an existing colonia the
construction of any new home, business, or other structure
which lacks water, wastewater, or other necessary
infrastructure;
(3) $10,000,000 shall be for grants to the State of Alaska
to address drinking water and wastewater infrastructure needs
of rural and Alaska Native Villages: Provided, That of these
funds: (A) the State of Alaska shall provide a match of 25
percent; (B) no more than 5 percent of the funds may be used
for administrative and overhead expenses; and (C) the State
of Alaska shall make awards consistent with the Statewide
priority list established in conjunction with the Agency and
the U.S. Department of Agriculture for all water, sewer,
waste disposal, and similar projects carried out by the State
of Alaska that are funded under section 221 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1301) or the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1921 et
seq.) which shall allocate not less than 25 percent of the
funds provided for projects in regional hub communities;
(4) $75,000,000 shall be to carry out section 104(k) of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), including grants, interagency
agreements, and associated program support costs: Provided,
That not more than 25 percent of the amount appropriated to
carry out section 104(k) of CERCLA shall be used for site
characterization, assessment, and remediation of facilities
described in section 101(39)(D)(ii)(II) of CERCLA;
(5) $50,000,000 shall be for grants under title VII,
subtitle G of the Energy Policy Act of 2005;
(6) $20,000,000 shall be for targeted airshed grants in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the report
accompanying this Act; and
(7) $1,044,829,000 shall be for grants, including
associated program support costs, to States, federally
recognized tribes, interstate agencies, tribal consortia, and
air pollution control agencies for multi-media or single
media pollution prevention, control and abatement and related
activities, including activities pursuant to the provisions
set forth under this heading in Public Law 104-134, and for
making grants under section 103 of the Clean Air Act for
particulate matter monitoring and data collection activities
subject to terms and conditions specified by the
Administrator, of which: $47,745,000 shall be for carrying
out section 128 of CERCLA; $9,646,000 shall be for
Environmental Information Exchange Network grants, including
associated program support costs; $1,498,000 shall be for
grants to States under section 2007(f)(2) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, which shall be in addition to funds
appropriated under the heading ``Leaking Underground Storage
Tank Trust Fund Program'' to carry out the provisions of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act specified in section 9508(c) of the
Internal Revenue Code other than section 9003(h) of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act; $17,848,000 of the funds available for
grants under section 106 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act shall be for State participation in national- and
State-level statistical surveys of water resources and
enhancements to State monitoring programs.

Amendment Offered by Mr. McNerney

Mr. McNERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 65, line 5, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $861,000,000)''.
Page 65, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $432,000,000)''.
Page 65, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $429,000,000)''.

[[Page H4758]]

Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. McNERNEY. Mr. Chairman, although I had planned to withdraw my
amendment, I feel it is important to discuss the Clean Water and Safe
Drinking Water State Revolving Funds and the benefits these funds
provide to our Nation.
Droughts are becoming more severe, which is putting an incredible
strain on our water supply in California, and in my district, where we
are experiencing a historic drought for the last 4 years. We have to
manage our available water in smart and efficient ways.
We lose an estimated 7 billion gallons of water a day from leaking
pipes, with some cities losing as much as 30 percent of their water. At
the same time, these cracks expose the water supply to an increasing
number of waterborne diseases and contaminants. This means utilities
face considerable challenges as they try to provide both adequate and
safe drinking water to families and businesses.
Upgrading our infrastructure would save trillions of gallons of water
a year and make our water safer to drink, but the best part is that,
according to the American Water Works Association, there are already
enough shovel-ready water projects around the United States that would
create work for more than 400,000 Americans, including almost 90,000
direct construction jobs. These are jobs that would be welcomed with
open arms in our towns and cities across the United States.
Our Nation's water infrastructure is in desperate need of repair.
According to an infrastructure needs survey by the EPA, nearly $335
billion worth of repairs, upgrades, and replacements are needed by
water systems in the next 20 years to continue providing safe drinking
water and protecting public health. Almost $300 billion is needed to
repair and replace wastewater and storm water pipes and treatment
plants.
Furthermore, the National Association of Clean Water Agencies and the
Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies estimate that utilities will
need to spend $448 billion to $944 billion by 2050 just to deal with
climate change impacts.
Considering the significant water infrastructure needs our country is
facing, the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Funds
have never been more important.

{time} 1645

These funds help finance projects that handle and treat domestic
sewage and storm water and deliver drinking water to homes and
businesses. These infrastructure investments also create jobs and have
a positive impact on the economy well beyond the amount spent.
Unfortunately, the bill proposes significant--and I want to repeat
that--significant reductions to drinking water SFRs and over a $400
million cut in the Clean Water Act sewage treatment SFRs.
The Nation's water infrastructure needs already exceed the available
funding, and cutting the revolving funds by this much means that a
greater number of deserving community projects will not be able to get
done. This approach will only imperil our infrastructure and our
healthy communities that it helps foster.
Congress should commit to providing the necessary funding to maintain
and upgrade our Nation's ailing water infrastructure and make sure that
the green infrastructure is a critical part of that process.
My State of California is doing its best to cope with a severe and
ongoing drought, and Congress must do its best to fund and support the
needed infrastructure and water quality enhancements that preserve our
precious water resources and create a sustainable system.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from California?
There was no objection.

Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Kildee

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 68, strike lines 1 and 2 and insert the following: ``:
Provided further, That an entity shall not be an eligible
recipient for a grant under this paragraph unless the entity
has experienced at least 15 percent population loss since
1970, as measured by data from the 2010 decennial census and
has experienced prolonged population, income, and employment
loss resulting in substantial levels of housing vacancy and
abandonment and such housing vacancies and abandonments are
concentrated in more than one neighborhood or geographic area
within a jurisdiction or jurisdictions.''.

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the
gentleman's amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman from Michigan and a
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, my hometown of Flint, Michigan, has endured
decades of job loss and population loss through the slow, painful
erosion of our manufacturing base. Previous trade deals, population
shifts, bad land use management, and trade deals like NAFTA, for
example, have accelerated the job losses in my hometown.
That has had the effect of reducing local revenues, creating lower
housing prices, less local services, and less investments in things
that matter the most, like infrastructure, including our own water
system. To reinvest in those places costs money that the cities don't
have.
The Drinking Water State Revolving Fund was specifically designed to
assist communities with maintaining and improving water infrastructure.
This fund provides critical support to ensure safe, clean drinking
water is available in our communities.
Many of us represent communities, however, that have outstanding
loans issued under the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund from prior
to 2009, and those loan funds are ineligible for certain types of help
because of the timing of those loans.
In Flint, our current water system loses over a third of the treated
water due to decades-old delivery systems before it even reaches the
faucets in homes and businesses. This city has relied on the Drinking
Water State Revolving Fund to improve this system, but the challenge
and the cost is immense.
The cost is even more daunting when the city is working to pull
itself out of an economic downturn that has lasted not just a few
years, but has lasted decades.
So we should, as Congress, give these communities the tools that they
need to build bridges and roads, to fix their aging water systems, and
bring, most importantly, economic development. My amendment would be an
important step to doing this.
First, it would allow current revolving loan funds to be used to
provide loan forgiveness to cities that have outstanding loans,
regardless of the date of the incurrence of that loan. Prior to 2009,
those loans are not eligible for loan forgiveness. Loans incurred after
2009 are actually eligible for forgiveness. So the first option, we
would like to see those pre-2009 loans eligible for forgiveness.
Second, the option to use new funds to provide loan forgiveness on
prior loans is limited because these cities have had--this amendment
would limit that loan forgiveness to cities that have had significant
financial problems due to population loss, cities that have had a
population loss of more than 15 percent since 1970 and also have a high
rate of abandoned and vacant buildings--basically, the cities that are
in no position right now to finance improvements to their system just
because of the level of abandonment, the level of population loss, and
the revenue loss associated with it.
Allowing financially distressed cities like Flint to have loans
forgiven will bring some stability to these communities and allow them
to better serve their residents.
So I ask for support for this amendment to help communities across
the country, like Flint, the backbone of the American economy in the
20th century, so that they can again become leaders in the 21st
century.
If we don't re-invest in those places and find ways to do that, we
are going

[[Page H4759]]

to have a difficult time having them join the economy in a way that
really makes a difference for the people who live there.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Point of Order

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the
amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes
legislation in an appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2
of rule XXI.
The rule states in pertinent part:
``An amendment in a general appropriations bill shall not be in order
if changing existing law.''
The amendment requires a determination.
I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point
of order?
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, other than to say that I will continue to
press every opportunity I have to find a way to help these communities.
I understand the gentleman's point of order, and I will continue to
work with him and any other Member of this body that will help me find
a path forward to help communities like this community of Flint that is
really struggling to deliver clean water to its residents.
The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point
of order?
If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
The Chair finds that this amendment includes language requiring new
determinations, such as levels of population loss and housing vacancy.
The amendment, therefore, constitutes legislation in violation of
clause 2 of rule XXI.
The point of order is sustained, and the amendment is not in order.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Administrative Provisions--Environmental Protection Agency

(including transfer and rescission of funds)

For fiscal year 2016, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 6303(1) and
6305(1), the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency, in carrying out the Agency's function to implement
directly Federal environmental programs required or
authorized by law in the absence of an acceptable tribal
program, may award cooperative agreements to federally
recognized Indian tribes or Intertribal consortia, if
authorized by their member tribes, to assist the
Administrator in implementing Federal environmental programs
for Indian tribes required or authorized by law, except that
no such cooperative agreements may be awarded from funds
designated for State financial assistance agreements.
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency is
authorized to collect and obligate pesticide registration
service fees in accordance with section 33 of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136w-
8).
Notwithstanding section 33(d)(2) of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C.
136w-8(d)(2)), the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency may assess fees under section 33 of FIFRA
(7 U.S.C. 136w-8) for fiscal year 2016.
The Administrator is authorized to transfer up to
$300,000,000 of the funds appropriated for the Great Lakes
Restoration Initiative under the heading ``Environmental
Programs and Management'' to the head of any Federal
department or agency, with the concurrence of such head, to
carry out activities that would support the Great Lakes
Restoration Initiative and Great Lakes Water Quality
Agreement programs, projects, or activities; to enter into an
interagency agreement with the head of such Federal
department or agency to carry out these activities; and to
make grants to governmental entities, nonprofit
organizations, institutions, and individuals for planning,
research, monitoring, outreach, and implementation in
furtherance of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and the
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.
The Science and Technology, Environmental Programs and
Management, Office of Inspector General, Hazardous Substance
Superfund, and Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund
Program Accounts, are available for the construction,
alteration, repair, rehabilitation, and renovation of
facilities provided that the cost does not exceed $150,000
per project.
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
shall base agency policies and actions regarding air
emissions from forest biomass including, but not limited to,
air emissions from facilities that combust forest biomass for
energy, on the principle that forest biomass emissions do not
increase overall carbon dioxide accumulations in the
atmosphere when USDA Forest Inventory and Analysis data show
that forest carbon stocks in the U.S. are stable or
increasing on a national scale, or when forest biomass is
derived from mill residuals, harvest residuals or forest
management activities. Such policies and actions shall not
pre-empt existing authorities of States to determine how to
utilize biomass as a renewable energy source and shall not
inhibit States' authority to apply the same policies to
forest biomass as other renewable fuels in implementing
Federal law.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Beyer

Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 73, strike lines 8 through 23.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Virginia and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chair, my amendment would correct the assertion in
this bill that all forest biomass is carbon neutral. The assertion is
simply scientifically inaccurate.
In 2012, EPA's Scientific Advisory Board directly challenged the
claim that all forest biomass is carbon neutral, explaining that while
some types of carbon biomass may indeed be, it is inappropriate to
assume that all types of forest biomass are carbon neutral. This
misperception could have serious consequences for wildlife habitat and
for our ability to combat climate change in the coming years. In fact,
numerous studies have underscored that using some types of forest
biomass, particularly slow-growing trees, can actually increase
atmospheric carbon for many decades.
The New York Times this Tuesday mentioned a study commissioned by the
State of Massachusetts that indicated that the climate impacts of
burning wood were worse than those for coal for 45 years and worse than
that for natural gas for 90 years.
To know what types of biomass are truly low-carbon, scientists need
to actually assess them, and treating all forest biomass as carbon
neutral is risky. The Energy Information Administration has found that
this will lead to a boom in the use of forest and other biomass for
energy.
While this sounds like a good idea on the surface, the resulting
logging would have dire consequences for climate mitigation and
wildlife habitat. It would also drive up the price of pulpwood and
other lower grades of wood for wood-product industries.
In my State of Virginia, local environmental organizations are
concerned that if biomass is treated as carbon neutral, it would
encourage Dominion Virginia Power to burn wood from forests to meet its
emission reduction obligations. Dominion has already converted three of
its existing coal plants to run on biomass fuel and has a hybrid energy
center that can burn up to 20 percent biomass for fuel.
I share the concern of these local groups that Virginia will become
known as a State that harvests forests to reduce its dependence on
coal, rather than developing renewable technologies that clearly reduce
emissions, such as solar and wind. More broadly, I worry about the
precedent that this will set for forest management policy in the U.S.
and around the world.
We have already seen that under the European Emissions Trading
System, where biomass has a zero emissions rating, European companies
have invested billions to convert coal plants to plants that can burn
wood pellets, leading to an incredible demand for wood. Earlier this
month, The Washington Post reported that Europe's climate policies have
led to more U.S. trees being cut down as wood pellets are being
exported to meet the demand for wood fuel.
More than two dozen pellet factories have been constructed in the
southeastern U.S. over the past decade, along with special port
facilities in Virginia and Georgia to ship the wood to Europe. Demand
for wood in Europe is so robust that wood pellet exports from the U.S.
nearly doubled from 2012 to 2013 and are expected to nearly double
again this year.
We should not create artificial demand to meet scientifically
unsubstantiated goals. It is critical that we make sure that the
accounting used to estimate net biogenic emissions is scientifically
accurate before we implement policies that might add carbon pollution
rather than reduce it.

[[Page H4760]]

Mr. Chair, I will withdraw this amendment, but I do so urging my
colleagues to support policies that are scientifically accurate, and to
realize that not all forest biomass is carbon neutral, and that the EPA
should take that into consideration.
I look forward to working with the chairman and the ranking member to
more appropriately consider biomass.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Moolenaar). Is there objection to the request
of the gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Of the unobligated balances available for ``State and
Tribal Assistance Grants'' account, $8,000,000 are
permanently rescinded: Provided, That no amounts may be
rescinded from amounts that were designated by the Congress
as an emergency requirement pursuant to the Concurrent
Resolution on the Budget or the Balanced Budget and Emergency
Deficit Control Act of 1985.
For fiscal year 2016, and notwithstanding section 518(f) of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1377(f)),
the Administrator is authorized to use the amounts
appropriated for any fiscal year under section 319 of the Act
to make grants to federally recognized Indian tribes pursuant
to sections 319(h) and 518(e) of that Act.

TITLE III--RELATED AGENCIES

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

forest and rangeland research

For necessary expenses of forest and rangeland research as
authorized by law, $277,507,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That of the funds provided, $70,000,000
is for the forest inventory and analysis program.

state and private forestry

For necessary expenses of cooperating with and providing
technical and financial assistance to States, territories,
possessions, and others, and for forest health management,
including treatments of pests, pathogens, and invasive or
noxious plants and for restoring and rehabilitating forests
damaged by pests or invasive plants, cooperative forestry,
and education and land conservation activities and conducting
an international program as authorized, $220,665,000, to
remain available until expended, as authorized by law; of
which $50,660,000 is to be derived from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund.

national forest system

(including transfers of funds)

For necessary expenses of the Forest Service, not otherwise
provided for, for management, protection, improvement, and
utilization of the National Forest System, $1,490,093,000, to
remain available until expended: Provided, That of the funds
provided, $40,000,000 shall be deposited in the Collaborative
Forest Landscape Restoration Fund for ecological restoration
treatments as authorized by 16 U.S.C. 7303(f): Provided
further, That of the funds provided, $355,000,000 shall be
for forest products: Provided further, That of the funds
provided, up to $81,941,000 is for the Integrated Resource
Restoration pilot program for Region 1, Region 3 and Region
4: Provided further, That of the funds provided for forest
products, up to $65,560,000 may be transferred to support the
Integrated Resource Restoration pilot program in the
preceding proviso: Provided further, That the Secretary of
Agriculture may transfer to the Secretary of the Interior any
unobligated funds appropriated in a previous fiscal year for
operation of the Valles Caldera National Preserve.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Benishek

Mr. BENISHEK. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Page 75, line 14, insert after the dollar amount the
following: ``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.
Page 76, line 8, insert after the dollar amount the
following: ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 333, the gentleman
from Michigan and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. BENISHEK. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my amendment
to H.R. 2822, the fiscal year 2016 Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies Appropriations bill.
Mr. Chairman, my district covers nearly half the State of Michigan
and includes three Federal forests. These forests are a major vacation
destination for people, not only in my district, but in districts of
Members all across the country.
Yet, sadly, many of our constituents arrive to the Federal forests of
northern Michigan to find that the road to their favorite fishing spot
or hiking trail or ORV path has been arbitrarily closed by the Forest
Service, with no warning and no input from the local community.
Mr. Chairman, the last thing that people want to do when they travel
to the woods of northern Michigan with their families is to learn about
the obscure policies of the U.S. Forest Service, a Federal agency that
treats the forests like their personal property instead of a public
resource for everyone to enjoy.

{time} 1700

Activities like hunting, snowmobiling, fishing, and hiking all depend
on access to these forests. And it is important to note that the
outdoor economy contributes over $5.5 billion and 194,000 jobs to
Michigan, most of which are in my district.
My amendment is an opportunity to demonstrate to the Forest Service
that their focus should be on making our forests more open and
accessible to the American people. In practice, the amendment would
reduce spending from the National Forest System vegetation and
watershed program by $2 million and transfer those funds into the
capital improvement and maintenance fund.
Now, you might ask yourself, What does that have to do with opening
forest roads?
Well, I will tell you.
According to the Forest Service, when work is necessary to open a
road for access, they use the capital improvement and maintenance fund.
If the Forest Service is working to close a road to appease
environmentalists who don't want anyone to visit the forest, they use
the vegetation and watershed line item.
My amendment is simple. It gives more dollars to the Forest Service
to keep roads open rather than closed. In addition, the CBO says that
this change would save taxpayers $1 million for fiscal year 2016.
Mr. Chairman, today I am standing up on behalf of my constituents in
my district who want to use their forests responsibly, who want to
teach their kids and grandkids how to hunt, fish, and snowmobile. They
want to enjoy nature. Furthermore, I am standing up today for the small
businesses that employ families throughout the outdoor economy.
For example, I recently visited Extreme Power Sports in Gaylord,
where they sell a variety of all-terrain vehicles, sleds, and safety
gear. This small business sells ATVs and sleds to users all over the
country who come to enjoy the trails and forests in our State and
beyond.
In addition to businesses like Extreme Power Sports, the hotels and
restaurants around northern Michigan are supported by those who come to
visit our forests year-round.
Healthy, accessible forests are important for our way of life in
northern Michigan and across the United States. All of our constituents
deserve improved access to the forests, and I urge my colleagues to
support this amendment.
Mr. SIMPSON. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BENISHEK. I yield to the gentleman from Idaho.
Mr. SIMPSON. I thank the gentleman for raising these concerns about
how the Forest Service is managing its roads and trails in Michigan. I
will tell you that the same concerns exist around the country, in Idaho
as well as other States, too.
Chairman Calvert and the committee would be happy to work with you on
this issue as the Interior bill moves through the process.
If there is no objection, we would be willing to accept the
amendment.
Mr. BENISHEK. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Benishek).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Rouzer) having assumed the chair, Mr. Bishop of Michigan, Acting Chair
of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H. R.
2822) making appropriations for the Department of

[[Page H4761]]

the Interior, environment, and related agencies for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2016, and for other purposes, had come to no
resolution thereon.

____________________